SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Keywords:

  • Biological invasions;
  • global database;
  • regions of origin;
  • shrub invasion;
  • tree invasion

Abstract

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Acknowledgements
  4. References
  5. Supporting Information

The global database of invasive trees and shrubs (Richardson & Rejmánek, 2011; Diversity Distrib. 17, 788-809) has been updated, resulting in a total of 751 species (434 trees and 317 shrubs) from 90 families. Ten originally listed species were deleted (synonyms, inconclusive identification, etc.) and 139 additional invasive species (86 trees and 53 shrubs) are now included in the database. For many species, new records on their adventive distributions are added. The updated database also includes the native ranges for all listed species.

Interest in the spread and impacts of non-native trees and shrubs on biodiversity and ecosystem functioning is accelerating (e.g., Holland-Clift et al., 2011; Keppel & Watling, 2011; Aslan et al., 2012; Brand et al., 2012; Meinhardt & Gehring, 2012; Rascher et al., 2012; Rodewald, 2012; Saure et al., 2013). This note reports on the update of our database of invasive trees and shrubs that was originally used as online supporting information for our global review of alien trees and shrubs (Richardson & Rejmánek, 2011). The database has been widely used, as shown by citations to the paper and by the volume of correspondence that we have received on a wide range of aspects of the list. As we predicted, mainly because of the lack of objective information from some regions, our initial list was incomplete. For these reasons, we feel that an update of the database should be made available to ecologists and managers. Our criteria for inclusion of species remain unchanged: the alien species should be not only naturalized (consistently reproducing), but invasive (spreading) in one or more of the 15 recognized geographical regions (for definitions see Pyšek et al., 2004). Because we deal explicitly with non-native species, cases of encroachment of native woody species (Eldridge et al., 2012) are not included in our database.

The process of updating resulted in the removal of ten of the 622 species in the original version. Some species included in the original database turned out to be synonyms for other species already listed (Cedrela toona Roxb. for Toona ciliata M. Roem., Fraxinus rotundifolia Mill. for F. angustifolia Vahl subsp. syriaca (Boiss.) Yalt., Rhamnus frangula L. for Frangula alnus Mill., Rosa eglanteria L. for R. rubiginosa L.), Acacia hockii De Wild. is native in the area where it was listed as invasive; Lonicera japonica Thunb. does not fit the definition of a shrub (it is a liana); the species status of Celtis in Southern Africa remains unresolved (C. australis/Coccidentalis); Sesbania bispinosa (Jacq.) W.Wight and Phytolacca americana L. are not woody; and Dodonea viscosa (L.) Jacq. is a cosmopolitan species (Harrington & Gadek, 2009).

On the other hand, 139 new invasive species (86 trees and 53 shrubs) were added to the database (see Appendix S1 in Supporting Information). Unfortunately, most of the new data are from previously well-covered regions and not from the regions where we believe reliable data are still missing (see below). The resulting 2013 version of the database includes 751 species (434 trees and 317 shrubs) from 90 families of angiosperms (84), gymnosperms (4) and tree ferns (2). For many species included in the original version of the database, new records on their adventive distributions were also added. Based on the current data, in terms of numbers of species, the most invaded regions are North America (212 species), Pacific Islands (208), Australia (203), Southern Africa (178), Europe (134) and Indian Ocean islands (126). Very low numbers for the Middle East (47) and Indonesia (41) may partly reflect the real situation, but the shortage of accurate information for these regions is certainly another reason. The resulting data matrix (751 × 15) is still very sparse. The majority of species (49.8%) are still reported as invasive from only one region and only 7.6% of species are recorded as invasive in six or more regions. As a substantial addition to the 2013 edition of the database, authorities for Latin names for all species are provided, and the native ranges for all species are reported (one or more of 15 recognized geographical regions). The major sources of invasive trees and shrubs are Asia, South America, Europe and Australia (each of them provided over 100 species, Asia over 200 species). A detailed analysis of species exchanges among geographical regions will be published separately.

Acknowledgements

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Acknowledgements
  4. References
  5. Supporting Information

As before, many botanists and invasion ecologists from all parts of the world contributed to this database. We thank them all. MR acknowledges support from the University of California Agricultural Experiment Station. DMR acknowledges support from the DST-NRF Centre of Excellence for Invasion Biology and the Working for Water Programme through the collaborative research project on ‘Research for Integrated Management of Invasive Alien Species’.

References

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Acknowledgements
  4. References
  5. Supporting Information
  • Aslan, C.E., Rejmánek, M. & Klinger, R. (2012) Combining efficient methods to detect spread of woody invaders in urban-rural matrix landscapes: an exploration using two species of Oleaceae. Journal of Applied Ecology, 49, 331338.
  • Brand, M.H., Lubell, J.D. & Lehrer, J.M. (2012) Fecundity of winged Euonymus cultivars and their ability to invade various natural environments. HortScience, 47, 10291033.
  • Eldridge, D.J., Maestre, F.T., Maltez-Mouro, S. & Bowker, M.A. (2012) A global database of shrub encroachment effects on ecosystem structure and functioning. Ecology, 93, 2499.
  • Harrington, M.G. & Gadek, P.A. (2009) A species well traveled – the Dodonea viscosa (Sapindaceae) complex based on phylogenetic analyses of nuclear ribosomal ITS and ETSf sequences. Journal of Biogeography, 36, 23132323.
  • Holland-Clift, S., O'Dowd, D.J. & Nally, R.M. (2011) Impacts of invasive willow (Salix x rubens) on riparian bird assemblages in south-eastern Australia. Austral Ecology, 36, 511520.
  • Keppel, G. & Watling, D. (2011) Ticking time bombs – current and potential future impacts of four invasive plant species on the biodiversity of lowland tropical rainforests in south-east Viti Levu, Fiji. South Pacific J Nat Appl Scien, 29, 4345.
  • Meinhardt, K.A. & Gehring, C.A. (2012) Disrupting mycorrhizal mutualisms: a potential mechanism by which exotic tamarisk outcompetes native cottonwoods. Ecological Applications, 22, 532549.
  • Pyšek, P., Richardson, D.M., Rejmánek, M., Webster, G.L., Williamson, M. & Kirschner, J. (2004) Alien plants in checklists and floras: towards better communication between taxonomists and ecologists. Taxon, 53, 131143.
  • Rascher, K.G., Hellman, C., Máguas, C. & Werner, C. (2012) Community scale 15N isoclades: tracing the spatial impact of an exotic N2-fixing invader. Ecology Letters, 15, 484491.
  • Richardson, D.M. & Rejmánek, M. (2011) Trees and shrubs as invasive alien species a global review. Diversity and Distributions, 17, 788809.
  • Rodewald, A.D. (2012) Spreading messages about invasives. Diversity and Distributions, 18, 9799.
  • Saure, H.I., Vadvik, V., Hassel, K. & Vetaas, O.R. (2013) Effects of invasion by introduced versus native conifers on coastal heathland vegetation. Journal of Vegetation science (in press) DOI: 10.1111/jvs.12010.

Supporting Information

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Acknowledgements
  4. References
  5. Supporting Information
FilenameFormatSizeDescription
ddi12075-sup-0001-AppendixS1.xlsapplication/msexcel999KAppendix S1. 2013 edition of a database of invasive trees and shrubs in 15 regions of the world: Af – Africa (north of 200S), AI – Atlantic islands, As – Asia, Au – Australia, CAm – Central America, Car – Caribbean islands, Eu – Europe, In – Indonesia, IO – Indian Ocean islands, ME – Middle East (from Turkey to Iran and Yemen, includes also Cyprus), NAm – North America, NZ – New Zealand, PI – Pacific Islands, SAf – Southern Africa, SAm – South America.

Please note: Wiley Blackwell is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.