Invasive species

Beavers from North America constitute an invasive species in Tierra del Fuego, where they have a substantial impact on landscape and local ecology through their dams.
Kudzu, a Japanese vine species invasive in the southeast United States, growing in Atlanta, Georgia

An invasive species is a plant or animal that is not native to a specific location (an introduced species); and has a tendency to spread, which is believed to cause damage to the environment, human economy and/or human health.[1]

One study pointed out widely divergent perceptions of the criteria for invasive species among researchers (p. 135) and concerns with the subjectivity of the term "invasive" (p. 136).[2] Some of the alternate usages of the term are below:

Causes

Scientists include species- and ecosystem factors among the mechanisms that when combined, establish invasiveness in a newly introduced species.

Species-based mechanisms

While all species compete to survive, invasive species appear to have specific traits or specific combinations of traits that allow them to outcompete native species. In some cases the competition is about rates of growth and reproduction. In other cases species interact with each other more directly.

Researchers disagree about the usefulness of traits as invasiveness markers. One study found that of a list of invasive and noninvasive species, 86% of the invasive species could be identified from the traits alone.[8] Another study found invasive species tended only to have a small subset of the presumed traits, and that many similar traits were found in noninvasive species, requiring other explanations.[8][9][10] Common invasive species traits include:

Typically, an introduced species must survive at low population densities before it becomes invasive in a new location.[13] At low population densities, it can be difficult for the introduced species to reproduce and maintain itself in a new location, so a species might reach a location multiple times before it becomes established. Repeated patterns of human movement, such as ships sailing to and from ports or cars driving up and down highways offer repeated opportunities for establishment (also known as a high propagule pressure).[14]

An introduced species might become invasive if it can outcompete native species for resources such as nutrients, light, physical space, water, or food. If these species evolved under great competition or predation, then the new environment may host fewer able competitors, allowing the invader to proliferate quickly. Ecosystems in which are being used to their fullest capacity by native species can be modeled as zero-sum systems, where any gain for the invader is a loss for the native. However, such unilateral competitive superiority (and extinction of native species with increased populations of the invader) is not the rule.[15][16] Invasive species often coexist with native species for an extended time, and gradually the superior competitive ability of an invasive species becomes apparent as its population grows larger and denser and it adapts to its new location.

An invasive species might be able to use resources that were previously unavailable to native species, such as deep water sources accessed by a long taproot, or an ability to live on previously uninhabited soil types. For example, barbed goatgrass (Aegilops triuncialis) was introduced to California on serpentine soils, which have low water-retention, low nutrient levels, a high Magnesium/Calcium ratio, and possible heavy metal toxicity. Plant populations on these soils tend to show low density, but goatgrass can form dense stands on these soils, crowding out native species that have adapted poorly to serpentine soils.[17]

Ecological facilitation occurs when a species alters its environment by using chemicals or manipulating abiotic factors, allowing the species to thrive while making the environment less favorable to competitors. One such facilitative mechanism is allelopathy, also known as chemical competition or interference competition, where a plant secretes chemicals that make the surrounding soil uninhabitable, or at least inhibitory, to competing species.

Examples of this in Centaurea are Centaurea solstitialis (yellow starthistle) and Centaurea diffusa (diffuse knapweed). These Eastern European noxious weeds have spread through the western and West Coast states. Experiments show that 8-hydroxyquinoline, a chemical produced at the root of C. diffusa, has a negative effect only on plants that have not co-evolved with it. Such co-evolved native plants have also evolved defenses. C. diffusa and C. solstitialis do not appear in their native habitats to be overwhelmingly successful competitors. Success or lack of success in one habitat does not necessarily imply success in others. Conversely, examining habitats in which a species is less successful can reveal novel weapons to defeat invasiveness.[18][19]

Changes in fire regimens are another form of facilitation. Bromus tectorum, originally from Eurasia, is highly fire-adapted. It not only spreads rapidly after burning but also increases the frequency and intensity (heat) of fires by providing large amounts of dry detritus during the fire season in western North America. In areas where it is widespread, it has altered the local fire regimen so much that native plants cannot survive the frequent fires, allowing B. tectorum to further extend and maintain dominance in its introduced range.[20]

Facilitation also occurs where one species so physically modifies a habitat in ways that are advantageous to other species. For example, zebra mussels increase habitat complexity on lake floors, providing crevices in which invertebrates live. This increase in complexity, together with the nutrition provided by the waste products of mussel filter-feeding, increases the density and diversity of benthic invertebrate communities.[21]

Ecosystem-based mechanisms

In ecosystems, the amount of available resources and the extent to which those resources are used by organisms determines the effects of additional species on the ecosystem. In stable ecosystems, equilibrium exists in the use of available resources. These mechanisms describe a situation in which the ecosystem has suffered a disturbance which changes the fundamental nature of the ecosystem.[22]

When changes such as a forest fire occur, normal succession favors native grasses and forbs. An introduced species that can spread faster than natives can use resources that would have been available to native species, squeezing them out. Nitrogen and phosphorus are often the limiting factors in these situations.[23]

Every species occupies a niche in its native ecosystem; some species fill large and varied roles, while others are highly specialized. Some invading species fill niches that are not used by native species, and they also can create new niches.

Ecosystem changes can alter species' distributions. For example edge effects describe what happens when part of an ecosystem is disturbed as when land is cleared for agriculture. The boundary between remaining undisturbed habitat and the newly cleared land itself forms a distinct habitat, creating new winners and losers and possibly hosting species that would not thrive outside the boundary habitat.

One interesting finding in studies of invasive species has shown that introduced populations have great potential for rapid adaptation and this is used to explain how so many introduced species are able to establish and become invasive in new environments. When bottlenecks and founder effects cause a great decrease in the population size, the individuals begin to show additive variance as opposed to epistatic variance. This conversion can actually lead to increased variance in the founding populations which then allows for rapid adaptive evolution.[24] Following invasion events, selection may initially act on the capacity to disperse as well as physiological tolerance to the new stressors in the environment. Adaptation then proceeds to respond to the selective pressures of the new environment. These responses would most likely be due to temperature and climate change, or the presence of native species whether it be predator or prey.[25] Adaptations include changes in morphology, physiology, phenology, and plasticity.

Rapid adaptive evolution in these species leads to offspring that have higher fitness and are better suited for their environment. Intraspecific phenotypic plasticity, pre- adaptation and post-introduction evolution are all major factors in adaptive evolution.[26] Plasticity in populations allows room for changes to better suit the individual in its environment. This is key in adaptive evolution because the main goal is how to best be suited to the ecosystem that the species has been introduced. The ability to accomplish this as quickly as possible will lead to a population with a very high fitness. Pre-adaptations and evolution after the initial introduction also play a role in the success of the introduced species. If the species has adapted to a similar ecosystem or contains traits that happen to be well suited to the area that it is introduced, it is more likely to fare better in the new environment. This, in addition to evolution that takes place after introduction, all determine if the species will be able to become established in the new ecosystem and if it will reproduce and thrive.

Ecology

Traits of invaded ecosystems

In 1958, Charles S. Elton[27] claimed that ecosystems with higher species diversity were less subject to invasive species because of fewer available niches. Other ecologists later pointed to highly diverse, but heavily invaded ecosystems and argued that ecosystems with high species diversity were more susceptible to invasion.[28]

This debate hinged on the spatial scale at which invasion studies were performed, and the issue of how diversity affects susceptibility remained unresolved as of 2011. Small-scale studies tended to show a negative relationship between diversity and invasion, while large-scale studies tended to show the reverse. The latter result may be a side-effect of invasives' ability to capitalize on increased resource availability and weaker species interactions that are more common when larger samples are considered.[29][30]

The brown tree snake (Boiga irregularis)

Invasion was more likely in ecosystems that were similar to the one in which the potential invader evolved.[31] Island ecosystems may be more prone to invasion because their species faced few strong competitors and predators, or because their distance from colonizing species populations makes them more likely to have "open" niches.[32] An example of this phenomenon was the decimation of native bird populations on Guam by the invasive brown tree snake.[33] Conversely, invaded ecosystems may lack the natural competitors and predators that check invasives' growth in their native ecosystems, a factor that affected Guam snake populations.

Invaded ecosystems may have experienced disturbance, typically human-induced.[11] Such a disturbance may give invasive species a chance to establish themselves with less competition from natives less able to adapt to a disturbed ecosystem.[13]

Vectors

Non-native species have many vectors, including biogenic vectors, but most invasions are associated with human activity. Natural range extensions are common in many species, but the rate and magnitude of human-mediated extensions in these species tend to be much larger than natural extensions, and humans typically carry specimens greater distances than natural forces.[34]

An early human vector occurred when prehistoric humans introduced the Pacific rat (Rattus exulans) to Polynesia.[35]

Chinese mitten crab (Eriocheir sinensis)

Vectors include plants or seeds imported for horticulture. The pet trade moves animals across borders, where they can escape and become invasive. Organisms stow away on transport vehicles. Ballast water taken up at sea and released in port by transoceanic vessels is the largest vector for non-native aquatic species invasions.[36] [37] Around the world on the average day, more than 3,000 different species of aquatic life may be transported on these vessels.[38] For example, freshwater zebra mussels, native to the Black, Caspian and Azov seas, probably reached the Great Lakes via ballast water from a transoceanic vessel.[39] Although the zebra mussel invasion was first noted in 1988, and a mitigation plan was successfully implemented shortly thereafter, the plan had (and continued to have as of 2005) a serious flaw or loophole, whereby ships that are loaded with cargo when they reach the Seaway need not be tested, but all the same they transfer ballast 'puddles' between Seaway ports, according to Professor Anthony Ricciardi.[40]

The arrival of invasive propagules to a new site is a function of the site's invasibility.[41]

Species have also been introduced intentionally. For example, to feel more "at home", American colonists formed "Acclimation Societies" that repeatedly imported birds that were native to Europe to North America and other distant lands. In 2008, U.S. postal workers in Pennsylvania noticed noises coming from inside a box from Taiwan; the box contained more than two dozen live beetles. Agricultural Research Service entomologists identified them as rhinoceros beetle, hercules beetle, and king stag beetle.[42] Because these species were not native to the U.S., they could have threatened native ecosystems. To prevent exotic species from becoming a problem in the U.S., special handling and permits are required when living materials are shipped from foreign countries. USDA programs such as Smuggling Interdiction and Trade Compliance (SITC) attempt to prevent exotic species outbreaks in America.

Economics plays a major role in exotic species introduction. High demand for the valuable Chinese mitten crab is one explanation for the possible intentional release of the species in foreign waters.

Impacts of wildfire

Invasive species often exploit disturbances to an ecosystem (wildfires, roads, foot trails) to colonize an area. Large wildfires can sterilize soils, while adding a variety of nutrients.[23] In the resulting free-for-all, formerly entrenched species lose their advantage, leaving more room for invasives. In such circumstances plants that can regenerate from their roots have an advantage. Non-natives with this ability can benefit from a low intensity fire burns that removes surface vegetation, leaving natives that rely on seeds for propagation to find their niches occupied when their seeds finally sprout.[20]

Impact of wildfire suppression on spreading

Wildfires often occur in remote areas, needing fire suppression crews to travel through pristine forest to reach the site. The crews can bring invasive seeds with them. If any of these stowaway seeds become established, a thriving colony of invasives can erupt in as few as six weeks, after which controlling the outbreak can need years of continued attention to prevent further spread. Also, disturbing the soil surface, such as cutting firebreaks, destroys native cover, exposes soil, and can accelerate invasions. In suburban and wildland-urban interface areas, the vegetation clearance and brush removal ordinances of municipalities for defensible space can result in excessive removal of native shrubs and perennials that exposes the soil to more light and less competition for invasive plant species.

Fire suppression vehicles are often major culprits in such outbreaks, as the vehicles are often driven on back roads often overgrown with invasive plant species. The undercarriage of the vehicle becomes a prime vessel of transport. In response, on large fires, washing stations "decontaminate" vehicles before engaging in suppression activities. Large wild fires attract firefighters from remote places, further increasing the potential for seed transport.

Effects

An American alligator attacking a Burmese python in Florida; the Burmese python is an invasive species which is posing a threat to many indigenous species, including the alligator

Ecological

Land clearing and human habitation put significant pressure on local species. Disturbed habitats are prone to invasions that can have adverse effects on local ecosystems, changing ecosystem functions. A species of wetland plant known as ʻaeʻae in Hawaii (the indigenous Bacopa monnieri) is regarded as a pest species in artificially manipulated water bird refuges because it quickly covers shallow mudflats established for endangered Hawaiian stilt (Himantopus mexicanus knudseni), making these undesirable feeding areas for the birds.

Multiple successive introductions of different non-native species can have interactive effects; the introduction of a second non-native species can enable the first invasive species to flourish. Examples of this are the introductions of the amethyst gem clam (Gemma gemma) and the European green crab (Carcinus maenas). The gem clam was introduced into California's Bodega Harbor from the East Coast of the United States a century ago. It had been found in small quantities in the harbor but had never displaced the native clam species (Nutricola spp.). In the mid-1990s, the introduction of the European green crab, found to prey preferentially on the native clams, resulted in a decline of the native clams and an increase of the introduced clam populations.[43] ely related to rare native species have the potential to hybridize with the native species. Harmful effects of hybridization have led to a decline and even extinction of native species.[44][45] For example, hybridization with introduced cordgrass, Spartina alterniflora, threatens the existence of California cordgrass (Spartina foliosa) in San Francisco Bay.[46] Invasive species cause competition for native species and because of this 400 of the 958 endangered species under the Endangered Species Act are at risk[47]

Economic

Benefits

Non-native species can have benefits. Asian oysters, for example, filter water pollutants better than native oysters. They also grow faster and withstand disease better than natives. Biologists are currently considering releasing this mollusk in the Chesapeake Bay to help restore oyster stocks and remove pollution. A recent study by the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health found the Asian oyster could significantly benefit the bay's deteriorating water quality.[48] This article incorporates CC-BY-3.0 text from the reference[49]

Notes
  1. "Definition of terms", Non-native Species Secretariat, accessed August 31, 2014.
  2. 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 "A neutral terminology to define 'invasive species'", Robert I. Colautti et al., Diversity and Distributions, (Diversity Distrib.) (2004) 10, 135–141.
  3. Exotic Pest Plant Council. 'Exotic Pest Plants of Greatest Ecological Concern in California' accessed 4/10/2010.
  4. (September 21, 2006). National Invasive Species Information Center - What is an Invasive Species?. United States Department of Agriculture: National Agriculture Library. Retrieved on September 1, 2007.
  5. USA (1999). "Executive Order 13112 of February 3, 1999: Invasive Species". Federal Register 64 (25): 6183–6186.
  6. "Communication From The Commission To The Council, The European Parliament, The European Economic And Social Committee And The Committee Of The Regions Towards An EU Strategy On InvasFpollive Species" (PDF). Retrieved 2011-05-17.
  7. Exotic Pest Plant Council. p. 1. accessed 4/10/2010.
  8. 8.0 8.1 Kolar, C.S.; D.M. Lodge (2001). "Progress in invasion biology: predicting invaders". Trends in Ecology & Evolution 16 (4): 199–204. doi:10.1016/S0169-5347(01)02101-2. PMID 11245943.
  9. Thebaud, C.; A.C. Finzi, L. Affre, M. Debussche, J. Escarre (1996). "Assessing why two introduced Conyza differ in their ability to invade Mediterranean old fields". Ecology (Ecology, Vol. 77, No. 3) 77 (3): 791–804. doi:10.2307/2265502. JSTOR 2265502.
  10. Reichard, S.H.; C. W. Hamilton (1997). "Predicting invasions of woody plants introduced into North America". Conservation Biology 11 (1): 193–203. doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.1997.95473.x.
  11. 11.0 11.1 Williams, J.D.; G. K. Meffe (1998). "Nonindigenous Species". Status and Trends of the Nation's Biological Resources. Reston, Virginia: United States Department of the Interior, Geological Survey 1.
  12. Ewell, J.J.; D.J. O’Dowd, J. Bergelson, C.C. Daehler, C.M. D’Antonio, L.D. Gomez, D.R. Gordon, R.J. Hobbs, A. Holt, K.R. Hopper, C.E. Hughes, M. LaHart, R.R.B. Leakey, W.G. Wong, L.L. Loope, D.H. Lorence, S.M. Louda, A.E. Lugo, P.B. McEvoy, D.M. Richardson, and P.M. Vitousek (1999). "Deliberate introductions of species: Research needs - Benefits can be reaped, but risks are high". BioScience 49 (8): 619–630. doi:10.2307/1313438. JSTOR 1313438.
  13. 13.0 13.1 Tilman, D. (2004). "Niche tradeoffs, neutrality, and community structure: A stochastic theory of resource competition, invasion, and community assembly". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 101 (30): 10854–10861. doi:10.1073/pnas.0403458101. PMC 503710. PMID 15243158.
  14. Verling, E.; G.M. Ruiz, L.D. Smith, B. Galil, A.W. Miller, and K.R. Murphy (2005). "Supply-side invasion ecology: characterizing propagule pressure in coastal ecosystems". Proceedings of the Royal Society B 272 (1569): 1249–1256. doi:10.1098/rspb.2005.3090. PMC 1564104. PMID 16024389.
  15. Stohlgren, T.J.; D. Binkley, G.W. Chong, M.A. Kalkhan, L.D. Schell, K.A. Bull, Y. Otsuki, G. Newman, M. Bashkin, and Y. Son; Chong, Geneva W.; Kalkhan, Mohammed A.; Schell, Lisa D.; Bull, Kelly A.; Otsuki, Yuka; Newman, Gregory; Bashkin, Michael; Son, Yowhan (1999). "Exotic plant species invade hot spots of native plant diversity". Ecological Monographs 69: 25–46. doi:10.1890/0012-9615(1999)069[0025:EPSIHS]2.0.CO;2.
  16. Sax, D.F.; S. D. Gaines and J. H. Brown (2002). "Species Invasions Exceed Extinctions on Islands Worldwide: A Comparative Study of Plants and Birds". American Naturalist 160 (6): 766–783. doi:10.1086/343877. PMID 18707464.
  17. Huenneke, L.; S. Hamburg; R. Koide; H. Mooney; P. Vitousek (1990). "Effects of soil resources on plant invasion and community structure in California (USA) serpentine grassland". Ecology 71 (2): 478–491. doi:10.2307/1940302. JSTOR 1940302.
  18. Hierro, J.L.; R.M. Callaway (2003). "Allelopathy and exotic plant invasion". Plant and Soil 256 (1): 29–39. doi:10.1023/A:1026208327014.
  19. Vivanco, J.M.; Bais, H.P.; Stermitz, F.R.; Thelen, G.C.; Callaway, R.M. (2004). "Biogeographical variation in community response to root allelochemistry: Novel weapons and exotic invasion". Ecology Letters 7 (4): 285–292. doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2004.00576.x.
  20. 20.0 20.1 Brooks, M.L.; D'Antonio, C.M.; Richardson, D.M.; Grace, J.B.; Keeley, J.E.; DiTomaso, J.M.; Hobbs, R.J.; Pellant, M.; Pyke, D. (2004). "Effects of invasive alien plants on fire". BioScience 54 (54): 677–688. doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2004)054[0677:EOIAPO]2.0.CO;2.
  21. Silver Botts, P.; Patterson, B.A.; Schlosser, D. (1996). "Zebra mussel effects on benthic invertebrates: Physical or biotic?". Journal of the North American Benthological Society (15): 179–184.
  22. Byers, J.E. (2002). "Impact of non-indigenous species on natives enhanced by anthropogenic alteration of selection regimes". Oikos 97 (3): 449–458. doi:10.1034/j.1600-0706.2002.970316.x.
  23. 23.0 23.1 Davis, M.A.; Grime, J.P.; Thompson, K. (2000). "Fluctuating resources in plant communities: A general theory of invisibility". Journal of Ecology 88 (3): 528–534. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2745.2000.00473.x.
  24. Prentis, Peter. "Adaptive evolution in invasive species". Trends in Plant Science 13 (6): 288–294. doi:10.1016/j.tplants.2008.03.004.
  25. Lee, Carol Eunmi. "Evolutionary genetics of invasive species". Trends in Ecology & Evolution 17 (86): 386–391.
  26. Zenni, R.D. "Adaptive Evolution and Phenotypic Plasticity During Naturalization and Spread of Invasive Species: Implications for Tree Invasion Biology". Biological Invasions 16 (3): 635–644. doi:10.1007/s10530-013-0607-8.
  27. Elton, C.S. (2000) [1958]. The Ecology of Invasions by Animals and Plants. Foreword by Daniel Simberloff. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. p. 196. ISBN 0-226-20638-6.
  28. Stohlgren, T.J.; Binkley, D.; Chong, G.W.; Kalkhan, M.A.; Schell, L.D.; Bull, K.A.; Otsuki, Y.; Newman, G.; Bashkin, M.; Son, Y. (1999). "Exotic plant species invade hot spots of native plant diversity". Ecological Monographs 69: 25–46. doi:10.1890/0012-9615(1999)069[0025:EPSIHS]2.0.CO;2.
  29. Byers, J.E.; E.G. Noonburg (2003). "Scale dependent effects of biotic resistance to biological invasion". Ecology 84 (6): 1428–1433. doi:10.1890/02-3131.
  30. Levine, J. M. (2000). "Species diversity and biological invasions: Relating local process to community pattern". Science 288 (5467): 852–854. doi:10.1126/science.288.5467.852. PMID 10797006.
  31. Williams, J.D.; G. K. Meffe (1998). "Nonindigenous Species". Status and Trends of the Nation's Biological Resources. Reston, Virginia: United States Department of the Interior, Geological Survey 1.
  32. Stachowicz, J.J.; D. Tilman (2005). "Species invasions and the relationships between species diversity, community saturation, and ecosystem functioning". In D.F. Sax, J.J. Stachowicz, and S.D. Gaines. Species Invasions: Insights into Ecology, Evolution, and Biogeography. Sunderland, Massachusetts: Sinauer Associates. ISBN 0-87893-811-7.
  33. Fritts, T.H.; D. Leasman-Tanner (2001). "The Brown Treesnake on Guam: How the arrival of one invasive species damaged the ecology, commerce, electrical systems, and human health on Guam: A comprehensive information source". Retrieved 2007-09-01.
  34. Cassey, P; T.M. Blackburn, R.P. Duncan and S.L. Chown (2005). "Concerning Invasive Species: Reply to Brown and Sax". Austral Ecology 30 (4): 475. doi:10.1111/j.1442-9993.2005.01505.x.
  35. Matisoo-Smith, E.; R.M. Roberts, G.J. Irwin, J.S. Allen, D. Penny, and D.M. Lambert (1998). "Patterns of prehistoric human mobility in Polynesia indicated by mtDNA from the Pacific rat". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 95 (25): 15145–15150. doi:10.1073/pnas.95.25.15145. PMC 24590. PMID 9844030.
  36. Molnar, Jennifer L; Gamboa, Rebecca L; Revenga, Carmen; Spalding, Mark D (2008). "Assessing the global threat of invasive species to marine biodiversity". Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 6 (9): 485–492. doi:10.1890/070064. ISSN 1540-9295.
  37. Xu, Jian; Wickramarathne, Thanuka L.; Chawla, Nitesh V.; Grey, Erin K.; Steinhaeuser, Karsten; Keller, Reuben P.; Drake, John M.; Lodge, David M. (2014). "Improving management of aquatic invasions by integrating shipping network, ecological, and environmental data". pp. 1699–1708. doi:10.1145/2623330.2623364.
  38. F. Moretzsohn, J.A. Sánchez Chávez, and J.W. Tunnell, Jr. (ed.). "Invasive Species". GulfBase: Resource Database for Gulf of Mexico Research. Harte Research Institute for Gulf of Mexico Studies at Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi. Retrieved March 19, 2013.
  39. Aquatic invasive species. A Guide to Least-Wanted Aquatic Organisms of the Pacific Northwest. 2001. University of Washington
  40. jsonline.com: "Noxious cargo" 31 Oct 2005
  41. Leung, B.; N.E. Mandrak (2007). "The risk of establishment of aquatic invasive species: joining invasibility and propagule pressure". Proceedings of the Royal Society B 274 (1625): 2733–2739. doi:10.1098/rspb.2007.0841. PMC 2275890. PMID 17711834.
  42. "Our Invaluable Invertebrate Collections". Ars.usda.gov. Retrieved 2011-05-17.
  43. Grosholz, E.D. (2005). "Recent biological invasion may hasten invasional meltdown by accelerating historical introductions". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 102 (4): 1088–1091. doi:10.1073/pnas.0308547102. PMC 545825. PMID 15657121.
  44. Hawkes, C.V.; I.F. Wren, D.J. Herman, and M.K. Firestone (2005). "Plant invasion alters nitrogen cycling by modifying the soil nitrifying community". Ecology Letters 8 (9): 976–985. doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00802.x.
  45. Rhymer, J. M.; Simberloff, D. (1996). "Extinction by hybridization and introgression". Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 27 (27): 83–109. doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.27.1.83.
  46. Ayres, D. et al. (2004). "Spread of exotic cordgrasses and hybrids (Spartina sp.) in the tidal marshes of San Francisco Bay, California". USA Biological Invasions 6 (2): 221–231. doi:10.1023/B:BINV.0000022140.07404.b7.
  47. Primtel, David (2005). "Update on the environmental and economic costs associated with alien-invasive species in the United States". Ecological Economics 52 (4): 1088–1091. doi:10.1073/pnas.0308547102. PMC 545825. PMID 15657121.
  48. Tom Pelton, Baltimore Sun, May 26, 2006.
  49. Odendaal, L. J.; Haupt, T. M.; Griffiths, C. L. (2008). "The alien invasive land snail Theba pisana in the West Coast National Park: Is there cause for concern?".". Koedoe - African Protected Area Conservation and Science 50 (1): 93–98. doi:10.4102/koedoe.v50i1.153.
Further reading
  • Derickx, Lisa; Pedro M. Antunes (2013). A guide to the identification and control of exotic invasive species in Ontario's hardwood forests. Invasive Species Research Institute - Algoma University. p. 294. ISBN 978-0-9291-0021-0.
  • Baskin, Yvonne (2003). A Plague of Rats and Rubbervines: The Growing Threat Of Species Invasions. Island Press. p. 377. ISBN 978-1-55963-051-1.
  • Burdick, Alan (2006) [2005]. Out of Eden: An Odyssey of Ecological Invasion. Farrar Straus and Giroux. p. 336. ISBN 0-374-53043-2.
  • Davis, Mark A. (2009). Invasion Biology. Oxford University Press. p. 243. ISBN 0-19-921876-5.
  • Elton, Charles S. (2000) [First published 1958]. The Ecology of Invasions by Animals and Plants. University of Chicago Press. p. 196. ISBN 978-0-226-20638-7.
  • Lockwood, Julie; Martha Hoopes; Michael Marchetti (2007) [2006]. Invasion Ecology. Blackwell Publishing. p. 304. ISBN 978-1-4051-1418-9.
  • McNeeley, Jeffrey A. (2001). The Great Reshuffling: Human Dimensions Of Invasive Alien Species. World Conservation Union (IUCN). p. 109. ISBN 978-2-8317-0602-3.
  • Terrill, Ceiridwen (2007). Unnatural Landscapes: Tracking Invasive Species. University of Arizona Press. p. 240. ISBN 0-8165-2523-4.
  • Van Driesche, Jason; Roy Van Driesche (2004). Nature Out of Place: Biological Invasions In The Global Age. Island Press. p. 377. ISBN 978-1-55963-758-9.

External links