Reducing redundancy in invasion ecology by integrating hypotheses into a single theoretical framework

By Jane A. Catford, Roland Jansson, C. Nilsson. 2009

1,090 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Insect Science, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ed11e7f62ea4e9809aa526caba4eb31104b2b6f8

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

1. Petr Pyšek
2. D. Richardson
3. Jonathan M. Jeschke
4. P. Hulme
5. I. Kühn
6. M. van Kleunen
7. Milan Chytrý
8. M. Vilà

In Insect Science

1. Petr Pyšek
2. D. Richardson
3. Jan Pergl
4. John R. U. Wilson
5. V. Jarošı́k
6. M. Vilà
7. P. Hulme
8. I. Kühn

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

1. Petr Pyšek
2. D. Richardson
3. Jonathan M. Jeschke
4. M. Vilà
5. P. Hulme
6. Jane A. Catford
7. Jan Pergl
8. I. Kühn

Citations in the corpus

• Species and environmental characteristics point to flow regulation and drought as drivers of riparian plant invasion (2014, background): “Biological invasion is a function of invader propagule availability, local environmental conditions and interactions between the invader and recipient community (Catford et al., 2009).”
• Three‐way interactions between plants, microbes and insects (2013, background): “Many hypotheses that try to explain the success or failure of plant and animal invasions are based on altered biotic interactions (Catford, Jansson & Nilsson 2009).”
• Plant invasions are context‐dependent: multiscale effects of climate, human activity and habitat (2014, background): “As the different metrics could be considered surrogates for different stages of invasion, our results reinforce that different stages might be controlled by different factors (Catford et al., 2009; Polce et al., 2011)”
• The Role of Propagule Pressure in Biological Invasions (2009, background): “Researchers increasingly recognize that invasions can be divided into two or more stages (e.g., Carlton 1985; Catford et al. 2009; Kolar & Lodge 2001, 2002); the extent to which these must be considered individually depends on the questions asked.”
• Soil microbial communities alter allelopathic competition between Alliaria petiolata and a native species (2010, background): “Many mechanisms have been proposed to explain the competitive superiority of invasive species, including a release from natural enemies, a greater ability to exploit anthropogenic disturbance and the presence of empty niches unfilled by any native species (Catford et al. 2009).”
• Functional responses can unify invasion ecology (2017, background): “biased towards plants or animals in their development and testing (Catford et al. 2009; Jeschke et al. 2012).”
• Four priority areas to advance invasion science in the face of rapid environmental change (2020, background): “Several distinct, and over a dozen overlapping, hypotheses explain invader impact (Ricciardi et al. 2013), and additional hypotheses addressing invasion establishment success could potentially be extended to understanding impact (Catford et al. 2009; Jeschke and Heger 2018).”
• Aquatic invasive species: challenges for the future (2015, background): “Biotic resistance, together with abiotic environmental factors, can often explain the failure of non-native species to invade a novel ecosystem (Catford et al., 2009).”
• Progress toward understanding the ecological impacts of nonnative species (2013, background): “To that end, we considered only hypotheses that address abundance and spread as they relate to events after the establishment of a nonnative species; events that lead to establishment have already been well covered in several other reviews (e.g., Catford et al. 2009, Blackburn et al. 2011).”
• MAcroecological Framework for Invasive Aliens (MAFIA): disentangling large-scale context dependence in biological invasions (2020, background): “This complexity is now fully appreciated and has been addressed by the development of numerous hypotheses and concepts (Catford et al. 2009; Enders et al. 2018, 2020; Jeschke and Heger 2018), theoretical frameworks (e.”
• Hotspots of plant invasion predicted by propagule pressure and ecosystem characteristics (2011, background): “…factors are likely to vary depending on stage of invasion (Catford et al., 2009; Dawson et al., 2009), so examining two stages of invasion (i.e. introduction/colonization versus naturalization: Richardson et al., 2000; Catford et al., 2009) can offer greater insight than aggregating them into one.”
• Mechanisms of Plant Invasions of North American and European Grasslands (2011, result): “Although this general conclusion may seem unsatisfactory, we feel the finding is based on a substantial, long-term research effort by the ecological community and is consistent with other recent summaries (e.g., Catford et al. 2009, Ehrenfeld 2010).”