Search

Aim:Species characteristics and cultivation are both associated with alien plant naturalization and invasiveness. Particular species characteristics are favoured for cultivation, obscuring the relationship between traits and naturalization success. We sought to better understand the drivers of naturalization and invasiveness by analysing relationships with species characteristics and cultivation and by disentangling the direct effects of characteristics from the indirect effects mediated by cultivation.Location:Great Britain.Time period:c. 1000–present.Major taxa studied:Seed plants.Methods:We used a comprehensive dataset of 17,396 alien plant taxa introduced to Great Britain before 1850, a country with one of the most well-documented histories of plant introductions. We integrated this with cultivation data from historical and modern records from botanic gardens and commercial nurseries and with trait data. Accounting for time since introduction, we quantified the influences of cultivation and species characteristics on present-day naturalization and invasiveness in Great Britain.Results:Larger native range size, earlier flowering, long-lived herbaceous growth form, and outdoor cultivated habitat were all associated with naturalization. However, these relationships between characteristics and naturalization largely reflected cultivation patterns. The indirect, mediating influence of cultivation on naturalization varied among species characteristics, and was relatively strong for growth form and weak for native range size. Cultivation variables, particularly availability in present-day nurseries, best explained invasiveness, while species characteristics had weaker associations.Main conclusions:Human influence on species introduction and cultivation is associated with increased probability of naturalization and invasiveness, and it has measurable indirect effects by biasing the distribution of species characteristics in the pool of introduced species. Accounting for human cultivation preferences is necessary to make ecological interpretations of the effects of species characteristics on invasion. published

Most current research on land-use intensification addresses its potential to either threaten biodiversity or to boost agricultural production. However, little is known about the simultaneous effects of intensification on biodiversity and yield. To determine the responses of species richness and yield to conventional intensification, we conducted a global meta-analysis synthesizing 115 studies which collected data for both variables at the same locations. We extracted 449 cases that cover a variety of areas used for agricultural (crops, fodder) and silvicultural (wood) production. We found that, across all production systems and species groups, conventional intensification is successful in increasing yield (grand mean + 20.3%), but it also results in a loss of species richness (−8.9%). However, analysis of sub-groups revealed inconsistent results. For example, small intensification steps within low intensity systems did not affect yield or species richness. Within high-intensity systems species losses were non-significant but yield gains were substantial (+15.2%). Conventional intensification within medium intensity systems revealed the highest yield increase (+84.9%) and showed the largest loss in species richness (−22.9%). Production systems differed in their magnitude of richness response, with insignificant changes in silvicultural systems and substantial losses in crop systems (−21.2%). In addition, this meta-analysis identifies a lack of studies that collect robust biodiversity (i.e. beyond species richness) and yield data at the same sites and that provide quantitative information on land-use intensity. Our findings suggest that, in many cases, conventional land-use intensification drives a trade-off between species richness and production. However, species richness losses were often not significantly different from zero, suggesting even conventional intensification can result in yield increases without coming at the expense of biodiversity loss. These results should guide future research to close existing research gaps and to understand the circumstances required to achieve such win-win or win-no-harm situations in conventional agriculture.