Hi colleagues,

=20

Please forgive my late entry into this topic of discussion but I did =
want to
throw out one or two issues concerning non-native species, invasive
non-natives, and biodiversity.

=20

One issue that has garnered very little discussion in a global context =
is
what constitutes a native species. Here in the US, with particular =
regard to
plants, the argument has always been in favor of the =93cutoff date=94 =
being
sometime prior to 1492 and the sailing of the =93ocean blue=94 however =
in
Britain, where much of my initial work on preserving native biodiversity =
was
developed, the consensus of opinion on a similar moment in history is =
seen
as the formation of the English channel (and hence the disconnection =
from
mainland Europe), which was about 9,000 years ago, and includes not only
plants that were already there but also those that arrived =
=93naturally=94 i.e.
as a result of the end of the Ice Age and consequent migration of plants
north-west as climate changed and ice retreated- oh, wait does any of =
this
sound familiar? (By the way, a colleague of mine recently told me that =
the
Inuit people with whom he works are in a real dilemma because they are
having to literally invent language for the first time because up until =
now
they have not needed the words for =93wasp=94, =93barn owl=94, or =
=93tuna!=94) Finding
the differentiation between human-created climate change as an =
instigator
and natural shifts and migrations of certain populations due to a =
natural
regulation mechanism is rather complex and certainly an emotive topic to =
try
to delve into, nevertheless as the landbridge and other natural =
connections
from South and Central America (ocean currents, avian seed dispersal) =
create
passage from South to North (and vice versa), there could be some very
specific examples of species that should perhaps be considered native or
properly naturalized (and I am not talking about the inane move to
re-classify crape myrtles, Lagerstroemia spp., as now native to =
California!)

=20

Point number two: that which constitutes non-native and invasive alien =
may
be an entirely differing set of issues dependent upon context and =
locality.
Some years ago Christopher Dick (Harvard University) published a very
interesting article in the Proceedings of the Royal Society where he =
showed
that in the absence of native pollinators, some native canopy-emergent
tropical trees were being genetically rescued precisely because of the
ability of alien pollinators to provide relatively long-distance gene =
flow-
in this situation, the tropical species was isolated in fragmented =
Amazonian
pastures (i.e. native pollinators were not =93ousted=94 by the aliens =
but were
victims of the set of proverbial edge effects created by habitat
fragmentation, one of which is to dissuade insect pollinators from =
migrating
from patch to patch and of course the reduction in core areas, the =
habitat
for forest dwelling pollinators.) Interestingly the savior happens to be
Apis mellifera scutellata, the Africanized honeybee. By the way, my own
research in tropical habitats and in particular SLOSS theory and habitat
fragmentation was to posit the term and the concept of =93biological
corridors=94 some 20 years ago. At that time, although many have =
developed my
ideas much further, some of my arguments centered not just upon the =
seasonal
and/or daily migrations of larger animals, but also on preserving the
opportunity for plants and invertebrates to secure genetic diversity and
reduce reproductive isolation. In many situations around the world, the
increased fragmentation of critical habitat, especially in
irregularly-shaped patches, and the subsequent reduction in core =
interior
space has allowed the proliferation and invasion of alien species that =
would
normally have been better controlled had human disturbance not occurred.

=20

Another aspect of the native issue is precisely the preservation of =
native
biodiversity across the multitude of mutualistic trophic levels. Here in =
the
District of Columbia, I am involved in the construction of greenroofs =
and am
attempting to connect them to closely adjacent or virtually contiguous
habitat strips constructed as integral to various Low Impact Development
(LID) elements such as raingardens and bioretention areas. This has =
become
the framework for developing a model for using the same corridor concept =
in
ultra-urban scenarios: the creation of core habitat areas (or =
remediation of
dysfunctional fragments into areas with more integrity) and linkages =
that
allow for effective support for biodiversity, whether it be routes of =
travel
to/from refuge to food, =93grazing=94 territories that must take into =
account
alternative prey measures as well as seasonal fluctuations, or continued
genetic migration to maintain species survival. Central to this project =
is
the use of native plant species that have historically supported native
insect species and so on. The usual arguments of their ability to exist =
in
=93native=94 climactic conditions aside (i.e. no over-dependence on =
water or
fertilizers), work by Paula Shrewsbury at the University of Maryland has
shown that the provision of alternate prey to natural insect predators =
by
ensuring a certain amount of species richness in native perennial =
selections
manages to provide a healthier ecosystem because although the numbers of
pests may increase, the persistence of native predators similarly =
increases
and so a balance is achieved. Further research by Doug Tallamy at the
University of Delaware shows exactly how important native woody species =
are
for preserving native biodiversity where he shows that 90% of all =
insects
that eat plants require native plants to complete their development =
because
as plants protect their leaves with toxic chemicals only insects with a =
long
evolutionary history between themselves and their host plants can =
survive
after eating those chemicals (i.e. after they have evolved physiological
mechanisms for detoxifying them.) Native insects only have such =
histories
with native plants. They have not been exposed to plants that evolved in
Europe or Asia long enough to be able to use them as host plants
successfully. Why is this important? Studies have shown that areas =
overrun
with alien plants produce 35 times less caterpillar biomass, the most
popular insect food with birds. Alien plants used in the ornamental =
trade
support 29 times fewer species of caterpillars than native ornamental
plants. (In the mid-Atlantic, native species from the genus Quercus =
support
534 spp. pf lepidoptera, Prunus supports 456 spp., Salix 455 spp., =
Betula
413 spp. etc. amongst herbaceous perennials, Solidago supports 115 spp.,
asters support 122 spp., Helianthus 73 spp. Eupatorium 42 spp. etc.)

=20

Finally (I guess my one or two points became four) my vote for number =
one
invasive alien would have to be for the amphibian chytrid fungus
Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis, introduced through lab specimens of a =
South
African frog species (where the disease was a stable endemic infection =
in
for 23 years before any positive specimen was found outside Africa) and =
is
the cause of amphibian deaths and population declines across at least =
three
continents (including Panama, Ecuador, Venezuela, New Zealand, =
Australia,
and Spain.)

=20

David Hilmy

Director of Conservation

KuTunza Environmental Education Program

Europe: 27 avenue de l'Op=E9ra, 75001 Paris, France

USA: 2804 Shepherd St., Mount Rainier, MD 20712; 202-316-4902

=20

Reply via email to