Comparing the Invasibility of Experimental “Reefs” with Field Observations of Natural Reefs and Artificial Structures

Natural systems are increasingly being modified by the addition of artificial habitats which may facilitate invasion. Where invaders are able to disperse from artificial habitats, their impact may spread to surrounding natural communities and therefore it is important to investigate potential factors that reduce or enhance invasibility. We surveyed the distribution of non-indigenous and native invertebrates and algae between artificial habitats and natural reefs in a marine subtidal system. We also deployed sandstone plates as experimental ‘reefs’ and manipulated the orientation, starting assemblage and degree of shading. Invertebrates (non-indigenous and native) appeared to be responding to similar environmental factors (e.g. orientation) and occupied most space on artificial structures and to a lesser extent reef walls. Non-indigenous invertebrates are less successful than native invertebrates on horizontal reefs despite functional similarities. Manipulative experiments revealed that even when non-indigenous invertebrates invade vertical “reefs”, they are unlikely to gain a foothold and never exceed covers of native invertebrates (regardless of space availability). Community ecology suggests that invertebrates will dominate reef walls and algae horizontal reefs due to functional differences, however our surveys revealed that native algae dominate both vertical and horizontal reefs in shallow estuarine systems. Few non-indigenous algae were sampled in the study, however where invasive algal species are present in a system, they may present a threat to reef communities. Our findings suggest that non-indigenous species are less successful at occupying space on reef compared to artificial structures, and manipulations of biotic and abiotic conditions (primarily orientation and to a lesser extent biotic resistance) on experimental “reefs” explained a large portion of this variation, however they could not fully explain the magnitude of differences

Propagule Pressure: A Null Model for Biological Invasions

null model, propagule pressure Invasion ecology has been criticised for its lack of general principles. To explore this criticism, we con-ducted a meta-analysis that examined characteristics of invasiveness (i.e. the ability of species to establish in, spread to, or become abundant in novel communities) and invasibility (i.e. the susceptibility of habitats to the establishment or proliferation of invaders). There were few consistencies among invasiveness char-acteristics (3 of 13): established and abundant invaders generally occupy similar habitats as native species, while abundant species tend to be less affected by enemies; germination success and reproductive output were significantly positively associated with invasiveness when results from both stages (establishment/ spread and abundance/impact) were combined. Two of six invasibility characteristics were also significant: communities experiencing more disturbance and with higher resource availability sustained greater establishment and proliferation of invaders. We also found that even though ‘propagule pressure ’ was considered in only 29 % of studies, it was a significant predictor of both invasiveness and invasibility (55 of 64 total cases). Given that nonindigenous species are likely introduced non-randomly, we contend that ‘propagule biases ’ may confound current paradigms in invasion ecology. Examples of patterns that could be confounded by propagule biases include characteristics of good invaders and susceptible habitats, release from enemies, evolution of ‘invasiveness’, and invasional meltdown. We conclude that propagule pressure should serve as the basis of a null model for studies of biological invasions when inferring process from patterns of invasion

Urban Biodiversity and Climate Change

Urban biodiversity refers to the variety and variability among living organisms found in a city and the ecological systems in which they occur. Overall, urban biodiversity responds to a combination of biogeographic and anthropogenic factors, with a strong influence of the latter. In a rapidly urbanizing world under the pressing threat of climate change, there is a growing interest in understanding how cities benefit from local biodiversity and how these benefits can be under threat due to climate change. This chapter addresses how the combined effects of climate change and urban factors affect urban biodiversity and the practical steps cities are taking to incorporate biodiversity issues in their development agendas