| Literature DB >> 26173623 |
Eric W Seabloom1, Elizabeth T Borer1, Yvonne M Buckley2, Elsa E Cleland3, Kendi F Davies4, Jennifer Firn5, W Stanley Harpole6, Yann Hautier7, Eric M Lind1, Andrew S MacDougall8, John L Orrock9, Suzanne M Prober10, Peter B Adler11, T Michael Anderson12, Jonathan D Bakker13, Lori A Biederman14, Dana M Blumenthal15, Cynthia S Brown16, Lars A Brudvig17, Marc Cadotte18, Chengjin Chu19, Kathryn L Cottingham20, Michael J Crawley21, Ellen I Damschen9, Carla M Dantonio22, Nicole M DeCrappeo23, Guozhen Du19, Philip A Fay24, Paul Frater14, Daniel S Gruner25, Nicole Hagenah26, Andy Hector27, Helmut Hillebrand28, Kirsten S Hofmockel14, Hope C Humphries29, Virginia L Jin30, Adam Kay31, Kevin P Kirkman32, Julia A Klein33, Johannes M H Knops34, Kimberly J La Pierre35, Laura Ladwig36, John G Lambrinos37, Qi Li38, Wei Li39, Robin Marushia40, Rebecca L McCulley41, Brett A Melbourne4, Charles E Mitchell42, Joslin L Moore43, John Morgan44, Brent Mortensen14, Lydia R O'Halloran45, David A Pyke23, Anita C Risch46, Mahesh Sankaran47, Martin Schuetz46, Anna Simonsen48, Melinda D Smith49, Carly J Stevens50, Lauren Sullivan14, Elizabeth Wolkovich51, Peter D Wragg1, Justin Wright52, Louie Yang53.
Abstract
Exotic species dominate many communities; however the functional significance of spn>ecies' biogeograpn>hic origin remains highly contentious. This debate is fuelled in part by the lack of globally replicated, systematic data assessing the relationshipn> between spn>ecies provenance, function and respn>onse to perturbations. We examined the abundance ofEntities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26173623 PMCID: PMC4518311 DOI: 10.1038/ncomms8710
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nat Commun ISSN: 2041-1723 Impact factor: 14.919
Figure 1Rank abundance distribution of native and exotic species.
Rank abundance plot showing maximal percent cover of native (N=1305) and exotic plant species (N=193) versus the relativized rank abundance, 100 R/N where R is the rank abundance of a native or introduced species (1 to N) and N is the total number of native or exotic species in the sample. The 95% confidence intervals (dashed lines) are calculated using 10,000 random bootstrap samples of 193 native species (grey lines). In this way, the confidence intervals control for the differences in the number of native and exotic species in the total data set.
Figure 2Nutrient and consumer effects on native and exotic cover and richness.
Effect of nutrient addition and consumer exclusion on cover and richness of native and exotic plants. The Consumer by Nutrient Experiment (a and c) is a factorial combination of nutrient addition (Nut) and consumer exclusion (Fnc) replicated at 34 sites. The Multiple Nutrient Experiment (b and d) is a full factorial addition of nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), and potassium with micronutrients (K) replicated at 37 sites. Plotted values are the estimated differences from the control of the change in cover or richness per year relative to pre-treatment sampling estimated using mixed-effects models. Interactions (for example, N*P, N*K, P*K, and N*P*K) test for additivity, with significant positive or negative values indicating super- or sub-additivity, respectively. Error bars are s.e. of the slope estimates. Slopes that are significantly different from zero are indicated as follows: ***P≤0.001, **P≤0.01 and *P≤0.05.
Figure 3Nutrient and consumer effects on relative exotic cover and richness.
Effect of nutrient addition and herbivore exclusion on the change in relative cover and richness of exotic plants. The Consumer by Nutrient Experiment (a and c) is a factorial combination of nutrient addition (Nut) and consumer exclusion (Fnc) replicated at 34 sites. The Multiple Nutrient Experiment (b and d) is a full factorial addition of nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), and potassium with micronutrients (K) replicated at 37 sites. Plotted values are the treatment effects on the annual change in relative cover or richness of exotics per year estimated using mixed-effects models. Interactions (for example, N*P, N*K, P*K, and N*P*K) test for additivity, with significant positive or negative values indicating super- or sub-additivity, respectively. Exotic cover and richness was relativized by dividing by the total cover or richness in a plot multiplying by 100. Error bars are s.e. of the slope estimates. Slopes that are significantly different from zero are indicated as follows: ***P≤0.001, **P≤0.01 and *P≤0.05.
Figure 4Effects of consumer fencing on native richness (a and b) exotic richness (c and d) ground-level light (a and c), and total biomass (b and d).
Richness effects are measured as the difference from pre-treatment values. Light and biomass effects are presented as log ratios (difference of logged values) relative to pre-treatment values. All effects are shown after three years of treatment. Significant linear regressions (P<0.05) are shown with a 95% confidence interval, the grey shaded area.