Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of contributors
- Preface
- 1 Urban ecology
- 2 Urbanisation
- 3 Urban environments and ecosystem functions
- 4 Individual species and urbanisation
- 5 Species diversity and urbanisation: patterns, drivers and implications
- 6 Urbanisation and alien invasion
- 7 Interactions between people and nature in urban environments
- 8 Urban ecology and human social organisation
- 9 Urban ecology and human health and wellbeing
- 10 Bringing cities alive: the importance of urban green spaces for people and biodiversity
- 11 Integrating nature values in urban planning and design
- 12 Urban futures
- Index
- References
6 - Urbanisation and alien invasion
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2012
Edited by
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of contributors
- Preface
- 1 Urban ecology
- 2 Urbanisation
- 3 Urban environments and ecosystem functions
- 4 Individual species and urbanisation
- 5 Species diversity and urbanisation: patterns, drivers and implications
- 6 Urbanisation and alien invasion
- 7 Interactions between people and nature in urban environments
- 8 Urban ecology and human social organisation
- 9 Urban ecology and human health and wellbeing
- 10 Bringing cities alive: the importance of urban green spaces for people and biodiversity
- 11 Integrating nature values in urban planning and design
- 12 Urban futures
- Index
- References
Summary
Introduction
Urbanisation is a rapidly developing process of global change. The world's human population in 1900 was around 1.6 billion, of which 13% lived in cities (UN-HABITAT2003, 2006). Within 100 years the world population increased to 6.5 billion and the urban population increased to 50% (UN-HABITAT 2006). This increase will continue rapidly. In Europe and other highly industrialised regions the percentage of urban population is already much higher (>70%). This urban population growth is strongly connected with an increase in the size and intensity of urban land-use. As a consequence of land-use change, more and more plant and animal habitats have been lost. Urbanisation is a major driver of plant and animal extinction on a regional scale (Fuller & Gaston 2009). The species most affected have been those of wet and very pristine habitats, as well as those of extensive agricultural lands like meadow and pasture, all of which have become rarer in heavily used landscapes such as those of Germany (Klotz 1989).
The concentration of the human population has resulted in an increase in traffic and transport of food, raw materials etc., and growing needs for open space recreation activities such as gardening and walking. Additionally, landscaping and gardening, as well as vegetable and ornamental plant production, are concentrated in urbanised regions. Therefore we have two of the general prerequisites for species introductions into cities. First, there is the concentration of intentional introductions of plant and animal species.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Urban Ecology , pp. 120 - 133Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2010
References
(2003). The coincidence of people and biodiversity in Europe. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 12, 5–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , et al. (2009). Do urban areas act as foci for the spread of alien plant species? An assessment of temporal trends in the UK. Diversity and Distributions, 15, 338–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , and (2009). Neo- and archaeophytes respond more strongly than natives to socio-economic mobility and disturbance patterns along an urban–rural gradient. Journal of Biogeography, 36, 835–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1998). Invasion, dispersal and ecology of the South African neophyte Senecio inaequidens in the Netherlands: from wool alien to railway and road alien. Acta Botanica Neerlandica, 47, 131–51.Google Scholar
and (2009). The scaling of green space coverage in European cities. Biology Letters, 5, 352–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, and (2009). How many birds are there in a city of half a million people?Diversity and Distributions, 15, 328–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2003). Roads as conduits for exotic plant invasions in a semiarid landscape. Conservation Biology, 17, 420–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and (1987). Ailanthus altissima (Mill.) Swingle – eine vergleichende pflanzengeographische Studie. Folia Geobotanica et Phytotaxonomica, 22, 241–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2005). The invasion of Central Europe by Senecio inaequidens DC. – a complex biogeographical problem. Erdkunde, 59, 34–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , et al. (2003). Socioeconomics drive urban plant diversity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 100, 8788–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , and (2006). The effects of adjacent land use on wetland species richness and community composition. Wetlands, 26, 79–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , et al. (2008). Grasping at the routes of biological invasions: a framework for integrating pathways into policy. Journal of Applied Ecology, 45, 403–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1989). Flora und Vegetation in der Stadt – ihre Spezifik und Indikatorfunktion. Bauforschung-Baupraxis, 244, 29–33.Google Scholar
, , et al. (2009). How species traits and affinity to urban land use control large-scale species frequency. Diversity and Distributions, 15, 533–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and (2008a). Do protected areas in urban and rural landscapes differ in species diversity?Biodiversity and Conservation, 17, 1595–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and (2008b). Challenging urban species diversity: contrasting phylogenetic patterns across plant functional groups in Germany. Ecology Letters, 11, 1054–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , et al. (2008c). Urbanization causes shifts in species' trait state frequencies. Preslia, 80, 375–88.Google Scholar
(2003). Biologische Invasionen. Neophyten und Neozoen in Mitteleuropa. Stuttgart: Ulmer.Google Scholar
and (2002). Floristischer Status und gebietsfremde Arten. In , and , eds. BIOLFLOR – Eine Datenbank zu biologisch-ökologischen Merkmalen der Gefäßpflanzen in Deutschland. Bonn: Bundesamt für Naturschutz, Schriftenreihe für Vegetationskunde Vol. 38, pp. 47–56.Google Scholar
and (2006). Urbanisation and homogenization – comparing the floras of urban and rural areas in Germany. Biological Conservation, 127, 292–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (2004a). The flora of German cities is naturally species rich. Evolutionary Ecology Research, 6, 749–64.Google Scholar
, and (2004b). BiolFlor – a new plant-trait database as a tool for plant invasion ecology. Diversity and Distributions, 10, 363–5.Google Scholar
(1974). Veränderungen von Flora und Vegetation einer Großstadt, dargestellt am Beispiel von Berlin (West). Dissertation, Technische Universität Berlin.Google Scholar
, and (2007). Compositional similarity among urban floras within and across continents: biogeographical consequences of human-mediated biotic interchange. Global Change Biology, 13, 913–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , et al. (2008). Distance decay of similarity among European urban floras: the impact of anthropogenic activities on beta diversity. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 17, 363–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , et al. (2008). Alien flora of Europe: species diversity, temporal trends, geographical patterns and research needs. Preslia, 80, 101–49.Google Scholar
, and (2000). Taxonomic homogenization of the global avifauna. Animal Conservation, 3, 27–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , et al. (2006). Patterns of plant traits in annual vegetation of man-made habitats in central Europe. Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics, 8, 69–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (2009). Relationships between avian diversity, neighborhood age, income, and environmental characteristics of an urban landscape. Biological Conservation, 142, 2578–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2005). Species introduced from nearby sources have a more homogenizing effect than species from distant sources: evidence from plants and fishes in the USA. Diversity and Distributions, 11, 367–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2006). Urbanization as a major cause of biotic homogenization. Biological Conservation, 127, 247–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1999). Biotic homogenization: a few winners replacing many losers in the next mass extinction. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 14, 450–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, , , and (2009). Distribution patterns of plants explained by human movement behaviour. Ecological Modelling, 220, 1339–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1982). The energetic basis of the urban heat island. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, 108, 1–24.Google Scholar
and (2003). Toward a mechanistic understanding and prediction of biotic homogenization. American Naturalist, 162, 442–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2000). Role of light availability and dispersal in exotic plant invasion along roads and streams in the H. J. Andrews Experimental Forest, Oregon. Conservation Biology, 14, 64–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1998). Alien and native species in Central European urban floras: a quantitative comparison. Journal of Biogeography, 25, 155–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , et al. (2009). Alien vascular plants of Europe. In , ed., The Handbook of Alien Species in Europe. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 43–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , et al. (2004). Alien plants in checklists and floras: towards better communication between taxonomists and ecologists. Taxon, 53, 131–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2006). The role of exotic species in homogenizing the North American flora. Ecology Letters, 9, 1293–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
, and (2008). Effects of introduced species on floristic similarity: comparing two US states. Basic and Applied Ecology, 9, 617–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (1999). Effects of urban land cover on the local species pool in Britain. Ecography, 22, 507–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (2006). Biotic homogenization of the California flora in urban and urbanizing regions. Biological Conservation, 127, 282–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1998). Urban ecology: scientific and practical aspects. In , and , eds., Urban Ecology. Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 3–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (2005). Movement of exotic plants into coastal native forests from gardens in northern New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Ecology, 29, 1–10.Google Scholar
(2003). Population, Education and Development. The Concise Report. New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
(2006). World Urbanization Prospects. The 2005 Revision. Executive Summary, Fact Sheets, Data Tables. New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
and (2007a). Crop seed spillage along roads: a factor of uncertainty in the containment of GMO. Ecography, 30, 483–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2007b). Long-distance dispersal of plants by vehicles as a driver of plant invasions. Conservation Biology, 21, 986–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (2008). Do cities export biodiversity? Traffic as dispersal vector across urban–rural gradients. Diversity and Distributions, 14, 18–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (2006). Biodiversity patterns of plants in agricultural and urban landscapes in Central Germany – spatial gradients of species richness. Landscape and Urban Planning, 75, 97–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , et al. (2009). Human-mediated dispersal of seeds over long distances. Proceedings of the Royal Society B – Biological Sciences, 276, 523–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
(1989). Migration and control of purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria L.) along highway corridors. Environmental Management, 13, 365–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , et al. (2010). The role of non-native plants and vertebrates in defining patterns of compositional dissimilarity within and across continents. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 19, 332–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and (2008). Spatial aspects of trait homogenization within the German flora. Journal of Biogeography, 35, 2289–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (1985). Urbanophob-Urbanoneutral-Urbanophil – behavior of species concerning the urban habitat. Flora, 177, 265–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(1996). More on the southward spread of common milkweed, Asclepias syriaca L. Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club, 123, 68–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 18
- Cited by