Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-5g6vh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T20:32:12.168Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Invasion Prediction on Alaska Trails: Distribution, Habitat, and Trail Use

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Elizabeth M. Bella
Elizabeth M. Bella*
Affiliation:
University of California–Davis, 1 Shields Drive, Davis, CA 99516
*
Corresponding author's E-mail: elizabeth.bella@lincoln.ac.nz
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Little is known about the relationship between frequency of occurrence and the expected maximum distance a nonnative species might spread along a trail once introduced to an ecological system with high native species integrity. Understanding how colonization and invasive plant habitat degradation occur in largely intact ecosystems is challenging. Determining which nonnative species are most likely to spread might be possible, given a suite of environmental or trail conditions. Spread may be linked to a particular set of environmental conditions, or to type and level of trail use. A field study conducted on trails in Forest Service and State Park lands on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska, was designed to determine frequency and spread distance of all nonnative vascular plant species per 100-m segments keyed to vegetation type, canopy cover class, aspect, trail use level, and trail use type. Although the maximum total number of nonnative species decreased with increased distances from trailheads, the average number of species remained nearly constant. Common dandelion, broadleaf plantain, and annual bluegrass exhibited consistent presence per canopy cover class or vegetation type. A nested subset analysis revealed a significant reduction in nonnative species presence beyond a 500-m distance from a trailhead and a moderately strong nestedness pattern. High-use trails exhibited the greatest numbers of nonnative species at the farthest distances from the trailhead and contained a greater number of less common nonnative species. Alaska and other northern biomes have relatively few widespread invasive problems, offering an opportunity to limit ecosystem degradation by invasion. Results suggest that control strategies might focus on high-use trails with open-canopy habitats to prevent spread.

Keywords

Common dandelionTaraxacum officinale F.H. Wigg. ssp. officinalebroadleaf plantainPlantago major L.annual bluegrassPoa annua L.AlaskaKenai Peninsulainvasive planttrail invasionsinvasion prediction
Type
Research
Information
Invasive Plant Science and Management , Volume 4 , Issue 3 , September 2011 , pp. 296 - 305
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Current address: Postdoctoral Fellow, Bio-Protection Research Centre, Lincoln University, Canterbury 7647, New Zealand

References

Literature Cited

[ADNR] Alaska Department of Natural Resources. 2002. Chugach State Park Access Inventory. Anchorage ADNR. 26 p.Google Scholar
Alston, K. P. and Richardson, D. M. 2006. The roles of habitat features, disturbance, and distance from putative source populations in structuring alien plant invasions at the urban/wildland interface on the Cape Peninsula, South Africa. Biol. Conserv. 132:183–198.Google Scholar
Atmar, W. and Patterson, B. D. 1993. The measure of order and disorder in the distribution of species in fragmented habitat. Oecologia 96:373–382.Google Scholar
Bartuszevige, A. M., Hrenko, R. L., and Gorchov, D. L. 2007. Effects of leaf litter on establishment, growth, and survival of invasive plant seedlings in a deciduous forest. Am. Midl. Nat. 158:472–477.Google Scholar
Bright, J. A. 1986. Hiker impact on herbaceous vegetation along trails in an evergreen woodland of central Texas. Biol. Conserv. 36:53–69.Google Scholar
DeVelice, R. L., Hubbard, C. J., Boggs, K., Boudreau, S., Potkin, M., Boucher, T., and Wertheim, C. 1999. Plant Community Types of the Chugach National Forest: Southcentral Alaska. Anchorage, AK. 377 p. USDA Forest Service.Google Scholar
Donlan, C. J., Knowlton, J., and Doak, D. F. 2005. Nested communities, invasive species, and Holocene extinctions: evaluation the power of a potential conservation tool. Oecologia 145:475–485.Google Scholar
Fleischman, E., Donnelly, R., Fay, J. P., and Reeves, R. 2007. Applications of nestedness analysis to biodiversity conservation in developing landscapes. Landsc. Urban Plan. 81:271–281.Google Scholar
Flory, S. L. and Clay, K. 2009. Invasive shrub distribution varies with distance to roads and stand age in eastern deciduous forests in Indiana, USA. Plant Ecol. 84:131–141.Google Scholar
Frid, L. and Wilmshurst, J. F. 2009. Decision analysis to evaluate control strategies for crested wheatgrass (Agropyron cristatum) in Grasslands National Park of Canada. Invasive Plant Sci. Manag. 2:324–336.Google Scholar
Gower, S. T. 2008. Are horses responsible for introducing non-native plants along forest trails in the eastern United State? Forest Ecol. Manag. 256:997–1003.Google Scholar
Gray, A. 2005. Eight nonnative plants in western Oregon forests: associations with environment and management. Environ. Monit. Assess. 100:109–127.Google Scholar
Hansen, M. J. and Clevenger, A. P. 2005. The influence of disturbance and habitat on the presence of non-native plant species along transport corridors. Biol. Conserv. 125:249–259.Google Scholar
Higgins, S. I. and Richardson, D. M. 1999. Predicting plant migration rates in a changing world: the role of long-distance dispersal. Am. Nat. 153:464–475.Google Scholar
Hobbs, R. J. and Huenneke, L. F. 1992. Disturbance, diversity, and invasion: implications for conservation. Conserv. Biol. 6:324–337.Google Scholar
Hulten, E. 1968. Flora of Alaska and Neighboring Territories. Stanford, CA Stanford University Press. 1008 p.Google Scholar
Ibanez, I., Silander, J. A. Jr, Wilson, A. M., LaFleur, N., Tanaka, N., and Tsuyama, I. 2009. Multivariate forecasts of potential distributions of invasive plant species. Ecol. Appl. 19:359–375.Google Scholar
Mack, R. N. 2003. Global plant dispersal, naturalization and invasion: pathways, modes and circumstances. Pages 3–30 in Ruiz, G. M. and Carlton, J. T., eds. Invasive Species Vectors and Management Strategies. Washington, DC Island.Google Scholar
Meekins, J. F. and McCarthy, B. C. 2001. Effect of environmental variation on the invasive success of a nonindigenous forest herb. Ecol. Appl. 11:1336–1348.Google Scholar
Mortensen, D. A., Rauschert, E. S. J., Nord, A. N., and Jones, B. P. 2009. Forest roads facilitate the spread of invasive plants. Invasive Plant Sci. Manag. 2:191–199.Google Scholar
Mount, A. and Pickering, C. M. 2009. Testing the capacity of clothing to act as a vector for non-native seed in protected areas. J. Environ. Manag. 91:168–179.Google Scholar
Parendes, L. A. and Jones, J. A. 2000. Role of light availability and dispersal in exotic plant invasion along roads and streams in the H. J. Andrews Experimental Forest, Oregon. Conserv. Biol. 14:65–74.Google Scholar
Pauchard, A. and Alaback, P. B. 2004. Influence of elevation, land use, and landscape context on patterns of alien plant invasions along roadsides in protected areas of south-central Chile. Conserv. Biol. 18:238–248.Google Scholar
Pickering, C. M. and Hill, W. 2007. Impacts of recreation and tourism on plant biodiversity and vegetation in protected areas in Australia. J. Environ. Manag. 85:791–800.Google Scholar
Pickering, C. M., Hill, W., Newsome, D., and Leung, Y. 2010. Comparing hiking, mountain biking and horse riding impacts on vegetation and soils in Australia and the United States of America. J. Environ. Manag. 91:551–562.Google Scholar
Rentch, J. S., Fortney, R. H., Stephenson, S. L., Adams, H. S., Grafton, W. N., and Anderson, J. T. 2005. Vegetation–site relationships of roadside plant communities in West Virginia, USA. J. Appl. Ecol. 42:129–138.Google Scholar
Rooney, T. P. 2006. Distribution of ecologically-invasive plants along off-road vehicle trails in the Chequamegon National Forest, Wisconsin. Mich. Bot. 44:178–182.Google Scholar
Rose, M. and Hermanutz, L. 2004. Are boreal ecosystems susceptible to alien plant invasion? Evidence from protected areas. Oecologia 139:467–477.Google Scholar
SAS. 2008. JMP, Version 7.0. http://www.jmp.com.Google Scholar
Simberloff, D., Relva, M. A., and Nunez, M. 2002. Gringos en el bosque: introduced tree invasion in a native Nothofagus/Austrocedrus forest. Biol. Invasions 4:35–53.Google Scholar
Tobin, P. C., Van Stappen, J., and Blackburn, L. M. 2010. Human visitation rates to the Apostle Islands National Lakeshore and the introduction of the non-native species Lymantria dispar (L.). J. Environ. Manag. 91:1991–1996.Google Scholar
Tyser, R. W. and Worley, C. A. 1992. Alien flora in grasslands adjacent to road and trail corridors in Glacier National Park, Montana (U.S.A.). Conserv. Biol. 6:253–262.Google Scholar
[USDA] U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service. 2002. Chugach National Forest Land Management Plan Alaska Region, Chugach National Forest, R10-MB-480a.Google Scholar
Verheyen, K., Vanhellemont, M., Stock, T., and Hermy, M. 2007. Predicting patterns of invasion by black cherry (Prunus serotina Ehrh.) in Flanders (Belgium) and its impact on the forest understorey community. Divers. Distrib. 13:487–497.Google Scholar
Wangen, S. R. and Webster, C. R. 2006. Potential for multiple lag phases during biotic invasions: reconstructing an invasion of the exotic tree Acer platanoides . J. Appl. Ecol. 43:253–268.Google Scholar
With, K. A. 2002. The landscape ecology of invasive spread. Conserv. Biol. 16:1192–1203.Google Scholar