Factors associated with introduction, naturalization, and invasion in Australian Proteaceae species.

<p>A) native range size; B) the number of susceptible and resistant species to <i>Phytophthora</i>; C) use as barrier plants; and D) plant height (m). Different letters indicate groups that differed significantly at <i>p</i><0.05. For barrier plants and susceptibility to <i>Phytophthora</i>, Fisher's exact test for count data was used. Only factors that explained at least 15% of either model are shown.</p

Taxonomic distribution of Proteaceae genera worldwide.

<p>Patterns depict A) introduced, B) naturalized and C) invasive species. Each point represents a genus (to avoid clutter only selected genus names are included) with lines indicating expectations from a hypergeometric distribution (median and 95% confidence intervals). Genera falling between the lines are not significantly over- or underrepresented. Genera above or below the intervals are significantly over- or underrepresented respectively. To assess how invasiveness differs across the genera of Proteaceae.</p

The number of Proteaceae species that are introduced, naturalized or invasive.

<p>Out of the 1674 species in the family at least 402 species have been introduced worldwide. Out of the 402 species, 336 species have not yet naturalized, 58 species are naturalized but not recorded as invasive and 8 species are invasive. In the same manner, out of the 1121 Australian species at least 206 species have been introduced, of which 147 have not yet naturalized, 51 are naturalized but not invasive and 8 are invasive. Numbers of genera in each category are shown in parentheses.</p

Summary of the boosted regression tree models of factors associated with naturalization (a) and invasion (b) in Proteaceae species.

<p>Only traits contributing at least 5% to the models are shown; traits that explained at least 15% of either model are shown in <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0075078#pone-0075078-g003" target="_blank">Figure 3</a> and Table S6. Data range includes the minimum and maximum values from the fitted functions and is representative of effect size.</p

Traits used in the analyses for separating introduced vs. naturalized and naturalized vs. invasive Proteaceae species.

<p>The range and median values for continuous variables are shown in parentheses.</p

Appendix B. A three-dimensional representation of the K-means cluster anlysis based on the mean position of the species along the three RLQ axes.

A three-dimensional representation of the K-means cluster anlysis based on the mean position of the species along the three RLQ axes

Appendix A. A list of names and abbreviations of the species entered in the analysis.

A list of names and abbreviations of the species entered in the analysis

Impact criteria for assigning alien species to different categories in the classification scheme (Box 2).

<p>These categories are for species that have been evaluated, have alien populations (i.e., are known to have been introduced outside their native range), and for which there is adequate data to allow classification (see <a href="http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001850#pbio-1001850-g002" target="_blank">Figure 2</a>). Classification follows the general principle outlined in the first row. However, we specifically outlined the different mechanisms through which an alien species can cause impacts in order to help assessors to look at the different aspects and to identify potential research gaps. Numbers next to different impact classes reference the numbering of impacts in the classification of impact mechanisms in the GISD (<a href="http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001850#pbio-1001850-g001" target="_blank">Figure 1</a>).</p

The different categories in the alien species impact scheme, and the relationship between them.

<p>Descriptions of the categories are provided in <a href="http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001850#pbio-1001850-box002" target="_blank">Box 2</a>. The CG category is not represented in this diagram as CG taxa may be found in any category.</p

Impact scheme of the Global Invasive Species Database, implemented by the IUCN Species Survival Commission (SSC) Invasive Species Specialist Group.

<p>The GISD stores detailed information on more than 800 invasive alien species, including on the impacts they cause. The GISD has recently been redesigned, and all information has been re-classified in order to improve the searching functionalities of the database. The schema developed for the revised GISD has allowed all species stored in the database to be coded in respect of the direct mechanisms by which their impacts occur (e.g., predation), and by the outcomes of those impact mechanisms on the environment or on human activities. For example, the grass <i>Imperata cylindrica</i> (Poales: Poaceae) almost doubles litter biomass in invaded locations, which increases potential fuel for fires (impact mechanism coded as flammability, and impact outcome as modification of fire regime). The plant <i>Schinus terebinthifolius</i> (Sapindales: Anacardiaceae) is a bio-fouling agent, forming dense thickets in gullies and river bottoms, with the ultimate effect of changing the hydrology of river streams of invaded freshwater bodies (mechanism coded as bio-fouling, and impact outcome described as modification of hydrology). The insect <i>Adelges piceae</i> (Hemiptera: Adelgidae) releases a toxin causing stress to trees, which eventually die. The impact outcome of <i>A. piceae</i> is described in GISD as damage to forestry, with its mechanism of impact coded as poisoning/toxicity, but it can also be coded as having an environmental impact on plant/animal health, as it has been here. In the table, mechanisms and outcomes are reported in two separate columns, and the three examples of the connections between mechanisms and outcomes are shown. Impact outcomes in the GISD database can be environmental or socio-economic, but our categorisation scheme of species in terms of the magnitudes of their impacts (<a href="http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001850#pbio-1001850-g002" target="_blank">Figure 2</a>; <a href="http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001850#pbio-1001850-t001" target="_blank">Table 1</a>) concerns only the former.</p