Time since first record and population density influence range sizes of non-native plants, but also of native plants, in a chronically overgrazed island
cover image of Plant Ecology and Evolution 154(2)

Supplementary Files

Supplementary file 1
Supplementary file 2
Supplementary file 3


non-native species
range size
residence time
sampling bias

How to Cite

Garcillán, P. and Martorell, C. (2021) “Time since first record and population density influence range sizes of non-native plants, but also of native plants, in a chronically overgrazed island”, Plant Ecology and Evolution, 154(2), pp. 173-182. doi: 10.5091/plecevo.2021.1806.


Background and aims − Humans are increasingly introducing species to new regions. It is necessary to understand the processes that drive the expansion of non-native species into these new habitats across multiple spatiotemporal scales.
Material and methods − We studied the spatial distribution of the non-native flora (39 species) of Guadalupe Island (246 km2) in the Mexican Pacific. We analyzed how residence time (time since first report in historical sources, 1875–2004) and species attributes (population density, flowering phenology, and individual height) are related with range sizes of non-native plants. To test whether the residence time – range size relationship of non-native plants can result from other factors besides time since their arrival, we compared it to the residence time – range size relationship of native plants. Range sizes were obtained using herbarium data and a systematic field sampling of 110 transects (50 × 2 m) throughout the entire island. We used beta regression to analyze the relationship of range sizes with residence time and species attributes.
Key results − Range sizes of non-natives showed a positive relationship with residence time, flower phenology, and notably with plant density, but not with individual height. However, similar relationships were found for native species, casting doubts on whether our results reflect the range expansion rates of non-native species.
Conclusions − Our results suggest that the production of large numbers of propagules, both as a result of long reproductive periods and large population sizes, determines to a large extent the rates of range size expansion of non-native species. However, the relationship we found between time since discovery and range size may arise from sampling biases, biological processes, or – most likely – both. This highlights the need for new approaches that allow us to discern the relative contributions of bias and process in our study of non-native species expansion.



Adler P.B., Raff D.A. & Lauenroth W.K. 2001. The effect of grazing on the spatial heterogeneity of vegetation. Oecologia 128: 465–479. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004420100737

Ahern R.G., Landis D.A., Reznicek A.A. & Schemsk D.W. 2010. Spread of exotic plants in the landscape: the role of time, growth habit, and history of invasiveness. Biological Invasions 12(3): 3157–3169. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-010-9707-x

Baker H.G. 1965. Characteristics and modes of origin of weeds. In: Baker H.G. & Stebbins G.L. (eds) The genetics of colonizing species: 147–169. Academic Press, New York.

Calflora: Information on California plants for education, research and conservation 2020. Berkeley, California. Available from https://www.calflora.org/ [accessed 20 Jan. 2020].

Castro S.A., Figueroa J.A., Muñoz-Schick M. & Jaksic F.M. 2005. Minimum residence time, biogeographical origin, and life cycle as determinants of the geographical extent of naturalized plants in continental Chile. Diversity and Distributions 11: 183–191. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1366-9516.2005.00145.x

Catford J.A., Jansson R. & Nilsson C. 2009. Reducing redundancy in invasion ecology by integrating hypotheses into a single theoretical framework. Diversity and Distributions 15: 22–40. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-4642.2008.00521.x

Chase J.M. 2003. Community assembly: when should history matter? Oecologia 136: 489–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-003-1311-7

Cribari-Neto F. & Zeileis A. 2010. Beta regression in R. Journal of Statistical Software 34(2): 1–24. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v034.i02

Díaz S., Lavorel S., McIntyre S., et al. 2007. Plant trait responses to grazing – a global synthesis. Global Change Biology 13: 313–341. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2006.01288.x

Elton C.S. 1958. The ecology of invasions by animals and plants. Methuen, London.

Engel C.E. & Engel A.E.J. 1961. Composition of basalt cored in Mohole project (Guadalupe site). American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin 45(11): 1799.

Erb K.-H., Gaube V., Krausmann F., Plutzar C., Bondeau A. & Haberl H. 2007. A comprehensive global 5 min resolution land-use data set for the year 2000 consistent with national census data. Journal of Land Use Science 2(3): 191–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/17474230701622981

Essl F., Dullinger S., Rabitsch W., et al. 2011. Socioeconomic legacy yields an invasion debt. Proceeding of National Academy of Sciences 108: 203–207. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1011728108

FNA – Flora of North America Editorial Committee (eds) (1993+) Flora of North America North of Mexico [Online]. 21+ vols. New York and Oxford. Available from http://beta.floranorthamerica.org [accessed 20 Jan. 2020].

Fuentes N., Ugarte E., Kühn I. & Klotz S. 2008. Alien plants in Chile: inferring invasion periods from herbarium records. Biological Invasions 10(5): 649–657. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-007-9159-0

Fuhlendorf S.D., Briske D.D. & Smeins F.E. 2001. Herbaceous vegetation change in variable rangeland environments: the relative contribution of grazing and climatic variability. Applied Vegetation Science 4: 177–188. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1654-109X.2001.tb00486.x

Fukami T. 2015. Historical contingency in community assembly: integrating niches, species pools, and priority effects. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 46: 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110411-160340

Garcillán P.P., Ezcurra E. & Vega E. 2008. Guadalupe Island: lost paradise recovered? Overgrazing impact on extinction in a remote oceanic island as estimated through accumulation functions. Biodiversity and Conservation 17(7): 1613–1625. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-008-9370-z

Garcillán P.P. & Ezcurra E. 2011. Sampling procedures and species estimation: testing the effectiveness of herbarium data against vegetation sampling in an oceanic island. Journal of Vegetation Science 22(2): 273–280. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1654-1103.2010.01247.x

Gassó N., Sol D., Pino J., et al. 2009. Exploring species attributes and site characteristics to assess plant invasions in Spain. Diversity and Distributions 15: 50–58. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-4642.2008.00501.x

Hortal J., Diniz-Filho J.A.F., Bini L.M., et al. 2011. Ice age climate, evolutionary constraints and diversity patterns of European dung beetles. Ecology Letters 14: 741–748. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01634.x

Hui C., Richardson D.M., Pyšek P., Le Roux J.J., Kučera T. & Jarošík V. 2013. Increasing functional modularity with residence time in the co-distribution of native and introduced vascular plants. Nature Communications 4: 2454. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms3454

Jepson Flora Project 2020. Jepson eFlora. Available from https://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/eflora/ [accessed on 20 Jan. 2020].

Junak S., Keitt B., Tershy B., Croll D., Luna-Mendoza L. & Aguirre-Muñoz A. 2005. Esfuerzos recientes de conservación y apuntes sobre el estado actual de la flora de Isla Guadalupe. In: Santos del Prado K. & Peters E. (eds) Isla Guadalupe, restauración y conservación: 83–94. Instituto Nacional de Ecología, Mexico DF.

Latombe G., Richardson D.M., Pyšek P., Kučera T. & Hui C. 2018. Drivers of species turnover vary with species commonness for native and alien plants with different residence times. Ecology 99: 2763–2775. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecy.2528

León de la Luz J.L., Rebman J. & Oberbauer T. 2003. On the urgency of conservation on Guadalupe Island, Mexico: is it a lost paradise? Biodiversity and Conservation 12: 1073–1082. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022854211166

Levine J.M., Pachepsky E., Kendall B.E., Yelenik S.G. & Lambers J.H.R. 2006. Plant-soil feedbacks and invasive spread. Ecology Letters 9: 1005–1014. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2006.00949.x

Levine J.M., Adler P.B. & Yelenik S.G. 2004. A meta-analysis of biotic resistance to exotic plant invasions. Ecology Letters 7: 975–989. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2004.00657.x

Milchunas D.G. & Lauenroth W.K. 1993. Quantitative effects of grazing on vegetation and soils over a global range of environments. Ecological Monographs 63: 328–366. https://doi.org/10.2307/2937150

Moran R. 1996. The flora of Guadalupe Island, Mexico. Memoirs of the California Academy of Sciences, No. 19. California Academy of Sciences, San Francisco.

Pachepsky E. & Levine J.M. 2011. Density dependence slows invader spread in fragmented landscapes. American Naturalist 177: 18–28. https://doi.org/10.1086/657438

Porensky L.M., Mueller K.E., Augustine D.J. & Derner J.D. 2016. Thresholds and gradients in a semi-arid grassland: long-term grazing treatments induce slow, continuous and reversible vegetation change. Journal of Applied Ecology 53: 1013–1022. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12630

Pyšek P. & Jarošík V. 2005. Residence time determines the distribution of alien plants. In: Inderjit S. (ed.) Invasive plants: ecological and agricultural aspects: 77–96. Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel.

Pyšek P. & Richardson D.M. 2007. Traits associated with invasiveness in alien plants: where do we stand? In: Nentwig W. (ed.) Biological invasions: 97–125. Springer-Verlag, Berlin & Heidelberg.

Pyšek P., Pergl J., Essl F., et al. 2017. Naturalized alien flora of the world. Preslia 89(3): 203–274. https://doi.org/10.23855/preslia.2017.203

R Core Team 2018. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Version 3.5.1. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. Available from https://www.R-project.org [accessed 11 Dec. 2018].

Rebman J., Oberbauer T. & León de la Luz J.L. 2002. The flora of Toro islet and notes on Guadalupe Island, Baja California, Mexico. Madroño 49: 145–149.

Rejmánek M. 2000. Invasive plants: approaches and predictions. Austral Ecology 25: 497–506. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1442-9993.2000.01080.x

Rejmánek M., Richardson D.M. & Pyšek P. 2005. Plant invasions and invasibility of plant communities. In: van der Maarel E. (ed.) Vegetation ecology: 332–355. Blackwell Science, Oxford.

Richardson D.M. & Pyšek P. 2012. Naturalization of introduced plants: ecological drivers of biogeographical patterns. New Phytologist 196: 383–396. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2012.04292.x

Richardson D.M. & Pyšek P. 2006. Plant invasions: merging the concepts of species invasiveness and community invasibility. Progress in Physical Geography 30: 409–431. https://doi.org/10.1191/0309133306pp490pr

Richardson D.M., Pyšek P., Rejmánek M., Barbour M.G., Panetta F.D. & West C.J. 2000. Naturalization and invasion of alien plants: concepts and definitions. Diversity and Distributions 6: 93–107. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1472-4642.2000.00083.x

Rouget M., Robertson M.P., Wilson J.R.U., et al. 2016. Invasion debt – quantifying future biological invasions. Diversity and Distributions 22: 445–456. https://doi.org/10.1111/ddi.12408

Schmidt J.P., Drake J.M. & Stephens, P. 2017. Residence time, native range size, and genome size predict naturalization among angiosperms introduced to Australia. Ecology and Evolution 7: 10289–10300. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.3505

Sheppard C.S. & Schurr F.M. 2019. Biotic resistance or introduction bias? Immigrant plant performance decreases with residence times over millennia. Global Ecology and Biogeography 28: 222–237. https://doi.org/10.1111/geb.12844

Shigesada N. & Kawasaki K. 2002. Invasion and the range expansion of species: effects of long-distance dispersal. In: Bullock J., Kenward R. & Hails R. (eds) Dispersal ecology. The 42th Symposium of the British Ecological Society: 350–373. Blackwell Science, Oxford.

Sun S. & Frelich L.E. 2011. Flowering phenology and height growth pattern are associated with maximum plant height, relative growth rate and stem tissue mass density in herbaceous grassland species. Journal of Ecology 99: 991–1000. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2745.2011.01830.x

Tadey M. 2020. Reshaping phenology: grazing has stronger effects than climate on flowering and fruiting phenology in desert plants. Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 42: 125501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ppees.2019.125501

Theoharides K.A. & Dukes J.S. 2007. Plant invasion across space and time: factors affecting nonindigenous species success during four stages of invasion. New Phytologist 176: 256–273. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2007.02207.x

van Kleunen M., Dawson W., Essl F., et al. 2015a. Global exchange and accumulation of non-native plants. Nature 525: 100–103. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14910

van Kleunen M., Dawson W. & Maurel N. 2015b. Characteristics of successful alien plants. Molecular Ecology 24: 1954–1968. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.13013

Vanderplank S.E., Rebman, J.P. & Ezcurra E. 2018. Revised and updated vascular plant checklists for the Baja California Northern Pacific Islands. Western North American Naturalist 78(4): 674–698. https://doi.org/10.3398/064.078.0410

Williamson M. & Gaston K.J. 1999. A simple transformation for sets of ranges sizes. Ecography 22(6): 674–680. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0587.1999.tb00516.x

Williamson M., Dehnen-Schmutz K., Kühn I., et al. 2009. The distribution of range sizes of native and alien plants in four European countries and the effects of residence time. Diversity and Distributions 15: 158–166. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-4642.2008.00528.x

Wilson J.R.U., Richardson D.M., Rouget M., et al. 2007. Residence time and potential range: crucial considerations in modelling plant invasions. Diversity and Distributions 13: 11–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-4642.2006.00302.x

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.