Ascidians as models for studying invasion success

A genetic paradox exists in invasion biology: how do introduced populations, whose genetic variation has probably been depleted by population bottlenecks, persist and adapt to new conditions? Lessons from conservation genetics show that reduced genetic variation due to genetic drift and founder effects limits the ability of a population to adapt, and small population size increases the risk of extinction. Nonetheless, many introduced species experiencing these same conditions during initial introductions persist, expand their ranges, evolve rapidly and become invasive. To address this issue, we studied the brown anole, a worldwide invasive lizard. Genetic analyses indicate that at least eight introductions have occurred in Florida from across this lizard's native range, blending genetic variation from different geographic source populations and producing populations that contain substantially more, not less, genetic variation than native populations. Moreover, recently introduced brown anole populations around the world originate from Florida, and some have maintained these elevated levels of genetic variation. Here we show that one key to invasion success may be the occurrence of multiple introductions that transform among-population variation in native ranges to within-population variation in introduced areas. Furthermore, these genetically variable populations may be particularly potent sources for introductions elsewhere. The growing problem of invasive species introductions brings considerable economic and biological costs. If these costs are to be mitigated, a greater understanding of the causes, progression and consequences of biological invasions is needed.

Plant invasions often involve rapid evolutionary change. Founder effects, hybridization, and adaptation to novel environments cause genetic differentiation between native and introduced populations and may contribute to the success of invaders. An influential idea in this context has been the Evolution of Increased Competitive Ability (EICA) hypothesis. It proposes that after enemy release plants rapidly evolve to be less defended but more competitive, thereby increasing plant vigour in introduced populations. To detect evolutionary change in invaders, comparative studies of native versus introduced populations are needed. Here, we review the current empirical evidence from: (1) comparisons of phenotypic variation in natural populations; (2) comparisons of molecular variation with neutral genetic markers; (3) comparisons of quantitative genetic variation in a common environment; and (4) comparisons of phenotypic plasticity across different environments. Field data suggest that increased vigour and reduced herbivory are common in introduced plant populations. In molecular studies, the genetic diversity of introduced populations was not consistently different from that of native populations. Multiple introductions of invasive plants appear to be the rule rather than the exception. In tests of the EICA hypothesis in a common environment, several found increased growth or decreased resistance in introduced populations. However, few provided a full test of the EICA hypothesis by addressing growth and defence in the same species. Overall, there is reasonable empirical evidence to suggest that genetic differentiation through rapid evolutionary change is important in plant invasions. We discuss conceptual and methodological issues associated with cross-continental comparisons and make recommendations for future research. When testing for EICA, greater emphasis should be put on competitive ability and plant tolerance. Moreover, it is important to address evolutionary change in characteristics other than defence and growth that could play a role in plant invasions.