Youtube Instagram Linkedin

Non-native and invasive tree species are abundant in neotropical secondary forest but decline over time

Angélica F. Resende1, Lourens Poorter2, Fabio A. R. Matos1, 3, Frans Bongers2, Ricardo César1, Gustavo Heringer4, 5, 6, Iris Hordijk2, Catarina C. Jakovac7, Masha T. van der Sande2, Robin L. Chazdon8, 9, Daisy H. Dent10, 11, 12, Géraldine Derroire13, 14, 15, Juan M. Dupuy-Rada16, Alfredo Fantini17, Geraldo W. Fernandes18, 19, José Luis Hernández-Stefanoni16, Peter Hietz20, Madelon Lohbeck2, Natalia Norden21, Jorge Ruíz22, Marcelo Tabarelli23, Hans F. M. Vester24, Pedro Manuel Villa5, 25, Bruno X. Pinho26, Danaë M. A. Rozendaal27, Bráulio A. Santos28, T. Mitchell Aide29, Jarcilene S. de Almeida-Cortez23, Angélica María Almeyda Zambrano30, Esteban Alvarez-Davila31, Mário M. Espírito-Santo32, Justin M. Becknell33, Eben N. Broadbent34, Carolina Castellano-Castro35, Jérôme Chave36, Daisy Christiane Zambiazi17, Saara J. DeWalt37, Maria C. Fandiño38, Jefferson S. Hall11, Alma Johanna Hernández39, Álvaro Idárraga40, André B. Junqueira41, Deborah Kennard42, Susan G. Letcher43, René López-Camacho44, Miguel Martínez-Ramos45, Jorge A. Meave46, Felipe Melo23, Rita Mesquita47, Francisco Mora45, Sandra C. Müller48, Yule R. F. Nunes32, Edgar Ortiz-Malavassi49, Marielos Peña-Claros2, Daniel Piotto50, Arturo Sanchez-Azofeifa51, Naomi B. Schwartz52, Alexandre Siminski17, Heitor Mancini Teixeira53, Maria Uriarte54, Michiel van Breugel11, 55, Maria D. M. Veloso32, Ima C. G. Vieira56, G. Bruce Williamson47, 57, Kátia J. Zanini48, Pedro H. S. Brancalion1, 58, 59

1 Department of Forest Sciences, ‘Luiz de Queiroz’ College of Agriculture, University of São Paulo, Piracicaba, Brazil
2 Forest Ecology and Forest Management Group, Wageningen University & Research, Wageningen, the Netherlands
3 Centre for Global Wood Security, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
4 Instituto Nacional da Mata Atlântica, Santa Teresa, Brazil
5 Associação para a Conservação da Biodiversidade (PROBIODIVERSA), Viçosa, Brazil
6 Institute of Biodiversity, Thünen Institute, Braunschweig, Germany
7 Center for Agricultural Sciences, Federal University of Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, Brazil
8 Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT, USA
9 Tropical Forests and People Research Centre, University of the Sunshine Coast, Maroochydore, Queensland, Australia
10 Department of Environmental Systems Sciences, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
11 Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, Balboa, Panama
12 Max Planck Institute of Animal Behavior, Konstanz, Germany
13 CIRAD, UMR EcoFoG (AgroParistech, CNRS, Inrae, Université des Antilles, Université de la Guyane), Kourou, French Guiana
14 CIRAD, UPR Forêts et Sociétés, University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France
15 Department of Forestry, University of Brasilia, Brasília, Brazil
16 Unidad de Recursos Naturales, Centro de Investigación Científica de Yucatán A.C., Mérida, Mexico
17 Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, Brazil
18 Departamento Genética, Ecologia & Evolução, ICB, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil
19 Knowledge Center for Biodiversity, Belo Horizonte, Brazil
20 Institute of Botany, BOKU University, Vienna, Austria
21 Centro de Estudios Socioecológicos y Cambio Global, Instituto de Investigación de Recursos Biológicos Alexander von Humboldt, Bogotá, Colombia
22 Programa de Estudios de Posgrado en Geografia, Convenio Universidad Pedagogica y Tecnológica de Colombia-Instituto Geografico Agustin Codazzi, Bogotá, Colombia
23 Departamento de Botânica-CCB, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Pernambuco, Brazil
24 Institute for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Dynamics, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
25 Graduate Program in Biodiversity and Nature Conservation, Institute of Biological Sciences, Federal University of Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, Brazil
26 Institute of Plant Sciences, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
27 Plant Production Systems Group & Centre for Crop Systems Analysis, Wageningen University & Research, Wageningen, the Netherlands
28 Departamento de Sistemática e Ecologia, Universidade Federal da Paraíba, João Pessoa, Brazil
29 Center for Conservation and Sustainability, Smithsonian National Zoo and Conservation Biology Institute, Washington, DC, USA
30 Center for Latin American Studies, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
31 Fundación Con Vida, Medellín, Colombia
32 Departamento de Biologia Geral, Universidade Estadual de Montes Claros, Montes Claros, Brazil
33 Environmental Studies, Colby College, Waterville, ME, USA
34 Spatial Ecology and Conservation Lab, School of Forest, Fisheries, and Geomatics Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
35 Instituto de Investigación de Recursos Biológicos Alexander von Humboldt, Bogotá, Colombia
36 Centre de Recherche sur la Biodiversité et l’Environnement, CNRS, Université de Toulouse, IRD, INPT, Toulouse, France
37 College of Biological Sciences, University of Minnesota Twin Cities, St. Paul, MN, USA
38 Fondo Patrimonio Natural para la Biodiversidad y las Áreas Protegidas, Bogotá, Colombia
39 Neotropical Primate Conservation Colombia, Bogotá, Colombia
40 Fundación Jardín Botánico de Medellín, Herbario JAUM, Medellín, Colombia
41 Science Panel for the Amazon, New York, NY, USA
42 Department of Physical and Environmental Sciences, Colorado Mesa University, Grand Junction, CO, USA
43 College of the Atlantic, Bar Harbor, ME, USA
44 Facultad de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales, Universidad Distrital Francisco José de Caldas, Bogotá, Colombia
45 Instituto de Investigaciones en Ecosistemas y Sustentabilidad, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Morelia, Mexico
46 Departamento de Ecología y Recursos Naturales, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Ciudad de México, Mexico
47 Biological Dynamics of Forest Fragments Project, Environmental Dynamics Research Coordination, Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazonia, Manaus, Brazil
48 Departamento de Ecologia, Instituto de Biociências, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil
49 Instituto Tecnológico de Costa Rica, Escuela de Ingeniería Forestal, Cartago, Costa Rica
50 Centro de Formação em Ciências Agroflorestais, Universidade Federal do Sul da Bahia, Itabuna, Brazil
51 Earth and Atmospheric Sciences Department, Centre for Earth Observation Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
52 Department of Geography, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
53 Soil Science Department, Universidade Federal de Viçosa, Viçosa, Brazil
54 Department of Ecology, Evolution & Environmental Biology, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
55 Department of Geography, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
56 Museu Paraense Emilio Goeldi, Belém, Brazil
57 Department of Biological Sciences, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA
58 Center for Carbon Research in Tropical Agriculture, University of São Paulo, Piracicaba, Brazil
59 re.green, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Abstract

Non-native and invasive species are among the leading causes of global biodiversity loss and could therefore compromise the recovery of native forests after disturbance, such as on abandoned agricultural lands. Here we evaluated how the relative density and richness of non-native woody species (NNS) change across secondary tropical forest succession, determined whether they vary between dry and moist forests and identified the underlying environmental and social drivers of these changes. We used data from 1,561 forest plots and 58 chronosequences from ten neotropical countries. We classified 3,735 woody species by origin and invasiveness. Our analyses and conclusions focus on NNS, whereas native (potentially) invasive groups were examined separately. NNS were widespread, occurring in 81% of the chronosequences and comprising 18% of dry and 41% of moist forest plots. We recorded 11 non-native invasive species, most of which were multifunctional trees associated with human activity. In early succession (the first 10–20 years), NNS reached high relative density and richness, accounting for 28% of stems and 22% of species in moist forests, and 9% of stems and species in dry forests. Both metrics declined considerably during the same period but were still present in late succession, mirroring the successional trajectory of native pioneer species, probably due to canopy closure and increased shading. Spatially, NNS richness increased with the Human Development Index. However, both density and richness were negatively affected by increasing surrounding forest cover, agricultural proximity and precipitation, while soil organic carbon generally favoured NNS retention. Our findings suggest that naturally regrowing forests and maintaining relatively intact forest landscapes provide nature-based solutions to control NNS, thereby protecting native biodiversity, ecosystem integrity and local livelihoods.
Access the full article

Check our most recent articles and news

  • Published Articles

Impact of Climate Change on Cyanobacteria–Cyanophage Interactions and Their Role in Cyanobacterial Blooms in Freshwater Lakes
  • Published Articles

Agrometeorology and crop modeling: Essential tools for sugarcane sustainability and productivity under climate change
  • Published Articles

Grass-based diversification of cotton production systems improves soil health and multifunctionality balance in tropical sandy soils
  • Open, Opportunities

JC-III Fellowship (Scientific Journalism) – Call for Applications