Figures
Abstract
A considerable number of host-specific biological control agents fail to control invasive plants in the field, and exploring the mechanism underlying this phenomenon is important and helpful for the management of invasive plants. Herbivory and competition are two of the most common biotic stressors encountered by invasive plants in their recipient communities. We predicted that the antagonistic interactive effect between herbivory and competition would weaken the effect of herbivory on invasive plants and result in the failure of herbivory to control invasive plants. To examine this prediction, thus, we conducted an experiment in which both invasive Mikania micrantha and native Coix lacryma-jobi were grown together and subjected to herbivory-mimicking defoliation. Both defoliation and competition had significantly negative effects on the growth of the invader. However, the negative effect of 75% respective defoliation on the above- and below-ground biomass of Mikania micrantha was alleviated by presence of Coix lacryma-jobi. The negative effect of competition on the above- and below-ground biomass was equally compensated at 25%, 50% and 100% defoliation and overcompensated at 75% defoliation. The interactive effect was antagonistic and dependent on the defoliation intensity, with the maximum effect at 75% defoliation. The antagonistic interaction between defoliation and competition appears to be able to release the invader from competition, thus facilitating the invasiveness of Mikania, a situation that might make herbivory fail to inhibit the growth of invasive Mikania in the invaded community.
Citation: Li J, Xiao T, Zhang Q, Dong M (2013) Interactive Effect of Herbivory and Competition on the Invasive Plant Mikania micrantha. PLoS ONE 8(5): e62608. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0062608
Editor: Harald Auge, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ, Germany
Received: June 2, 2012; Accepted: March 27, 2013; Published: May 30, 2013
Copyright: © 2013 Li, Dong. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Funding: Support for the project was provided through funding from National Natural Science Foundation of China (30800133 and 39825106), China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (20080440557), National Natural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province of China (Y5110227) and the Innovative R & D Projects of Hangzhou Normal University. The funders had no role in the study design, data collection and analysis,decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Introduction
Invasive plants pose severe threats to biological diversity and ecosystems [1], and many methods have been used to control invasive plants. Biological control, i.e., using natural enemies to control invasion success, has received much attention [2], [3] and has been highly successfully used to control noxious weeds, such as Senecio jacobaea [4] and Ageratina riparia [5]. Biological control, being effective and having a low cost and relatively high environmental safety, has been widely accepted [6]. However, many natural enemies have recently been verified as being inefficient in biologically controlling invasive plants in the invaded communities [7], [8], even though the host-specific agents were efficient in pot experiments. Thus, exploring the mechanism underlying this phenomenon would be important and useful in developing future biological controls of invasive species.
It has been noted that the failure of biocontrol might be due to the focus on simple predator-prey relationships and the disregard of more complex interactions in the invaded community [8]. In a natural ecosystem, herbivory and competition are two of the most common biotic stressors that plants encounter [9],[10], and both play important roles in shaping the structure and dynamics of the community [11]; this is true for both the invasive plants and the invaded community [11]. It is well known that both herbivory and competition from native competitors in the invaded community can negatively affect invasive plants and reduce their growth and fitness [12], [13]. Inter-specific competition and herbivory can have synergistic effects on the performance of the attacked invasive host plant [14]–[16] and, as a result, release native neighbours from competition [17], thus limiting invasive success in the invaded community and facilitating the restoration of the native community [18]. However, only few studies have revealed the independent [19] and antagonistic [10], [20] interactive effects of herbivory and competition on invasive plants. We predicted that the antagonistic interactive effect between herbivory and competition could induce the compensatory growth of invasive plants and weaken the effect of herbivory on invasive plants, which would release invasive plants from the naeighbouring competitors and result in the failure of herbivory to control invasive plants. Obviously, an understanding of the interactive effect of herbivory and competition on the performance of invasive plants and the structure and dynamics of the invaded community is important to predict the effectiveness of biological agents on the invasive plants in an invaded community.
Mikania (Asteraceae) (hereafter referred to as Mikania), a perennial weed native to Central and South America, was introduced into China in ca. 1919 and subsequently became an invader. Mikania has caused serious and extensive damage to many Chinese ecosystems, particularly in recent decades [21]. Mikania rarely behaves as a weed in its native range because it encounters strong natural enemies in its habitats [22]. Since 1989, herbivores, such as Liothrips mikaniae, were introduced to Malaysia, India and China but failed in the biological control of Mikania [23]; however, the main reason for the failure is still unknown.
Coix lacryma-jobi (Poaceae) (hereafter referred to as Coix) is a native annual grass, commonly occurring in the communities that are subject to invasion by Mikania. We conducted an experiment in which invasive Mikania was growing with native Coix and was treated with defoliation-mimicking herbivory to examine the interactive effect between herbivory and competition on invasive Mikania. We predicted that an antagonistic interaction between herbivory and competition from native species would enhance the performance of the invasive Mikania and release it from competition. In particular, we addressed the following questions: 1) Can competition from the native neighbouring Coix affect the response of the invasive Mikania to defoliation? 2) Can defoliation affect the impact of competition on the invasive Mikania and release it from competition? 3) Is the interaction between defoliation and competition antagonistic?
Moreover, the extent to which plants respond to herbivory might be dependent on the intensity of herbivory [24]. Puettmann and Saunders found that the compensatory growth of Pinus strobes seedlings varied with the competitive conditions and clipping intensity [24]. Accordingly, we also aimed to address the following question: 4) Does the intensity of defoliation affect the interactive effect? In this study, some physiological traits of invasive Mikania were also measured to explore the mechanical responses to the interaction between defoliation and competition.
Actinote thalia pyrrha (Fabricius), a natural enemy in the native range of Mikania, is currently being introduced to India [25] and China [26], [27] to control Mikania. A. thalia pyrrha is verified as a potential agent of biological control, as the insect consumes all of the young leaves and stems of Mikania [26]. The results of our research could provide information for the management of invasive Mikania and also for the application of natural enemies to control invasive Mikania.
Materials and Methods
Study Site
We conducted our pot experiment in the village of Dengshuiling, southeast of Dongguan City (E 113°31′ −114°15′; N 22°39′−23°09′), Guangdong Province, China. The area has a marine subtropical climate, with a mean annual precipitation of 1819.9 mm, mean annual temperature of 23.1°C and mean annual sunshine time of 1873.7 hr. The zonal vegetation is subtropical evergreen broadleaved forest codominated by Dactyloctenium aegyptium, Paederia scandens and Pharbitis nil. Mikania began to invade this area in the early 1990 s and spread extensively in shrublands and old fields.
Experimental Design and Measurements
Invasive Mikania was collected from the fields surrounding Dengshuiling and then propagated using cuttings. The site is located in an open and abandoned field, and no specific permits were required for the described field studies. Native Coix was germinated from seeds that were purchased from Shandong Heze Chinese Medicine Institute. We filled our experimental pots (3 L) with field-collected red clay soil mixed with sand (3∶1).
Artificial defoliation has been employed extensively as a method of simulating herbivore attack [12],[28]–[30] and has recently been used to simulate biological agents to control invasive plants [20], [31], [32]. Although artificial defoliation does not always elicit the same results as true herbivory, it can allow researchers to control the amount of defoliation precisely [20]. We used defoliation to mimic the herbivory that plants are likely to encounter in nature. A factorial combination of defoliation intensities (0%, 25%, 50%, 75% or 100%) and competition (with or without) were applied to treat invasive Mikania. A total of 10 treatments were used in this experiment, and 5 replicates were used for each treatment, amounting to 50 pots. For the experiment without competition, an individual Mikania plant was transplanted into each pot; for the competition treatment, an individual Mikania plant and one Coix plant of similar size were transplanted together into each pot with a distance of 15 cm between them. The pots were irrigated with tap water twice daily and fertilised with 50% Hoagland's nutrient solution once per week [33]. Bamboo sticks (1 m long) were inserted into the soil near Mikania to allow the plant to climb. Three weeks after transplantation, Mikania plants of similar size were chosen for defoliation. Herbivory by A. thalia pyrrha on Mikania can remove all of the leaves [26]. To simulate a realistic intensity of herbivory, five intensities were included in this experiment: (1) 0% defoliation, (2) 25% defoliation, (3) 50% defoliation, (4) 75% defoliation, and (5) 100% defoliation. These treatments constituted removing 0%∼45% of the total above-ground biomass at the time of clipping to simulate zero to moderate aboveground herbivory [34]. The defoliation of Mikania was performed by removing each leaf with scissors, leaving the petiole attached to the stem.
After four weeks from the date of the first defoliation, a second defoliation at different levels was conducted on the newly emerging leaves. The physiological responses of plants to defoliation have received considerable attention and are considered a potential mechanism of the compensatory growth response to defoliation [35]. After three weeks from the date of the second defoliation, the net photosynthetic rate (Pn), transpiration rate (E) and leaf photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) of the Mikania plants were measured using a portable photosynthesis and transpiration system (LCA-4, Analytical Development Co. Ltd, Hoddesdon, UK) on the terminal leaflet of the third mature leaf from the top of the plant. The measurements were performed between 9∶00 and 11∶00 am under light intensity of 1400 μmol m−2 s−1, leaf temperature of 30°C, CO2 concentration of 350 ppm and relative moisture of 55%. The light use efficiency was calculated as Pn/PAR [36], and the water use efficiency as Pn/E [37]. The harvested plants were then separated into shoots and roots and dried for 48 h at 80°C to determine the final total biomass.
Data Analyses
To investigate the effects of herbivory and competition on the growth of Mikania in more detail, we calculated four response indices for the above-ground biomass of Mikania: defoliation responses (DR = with defoliation/without defoliation) and competition responses (CR = with competition/without competition [10]. This calculation is based on a null model that competition and herbivory do not interact and respond multiplicatively on a linear scale. If DR or CR = 1, there would be no effect of competition or herbivory on plant growth. If DR or CR <1, there would be a negative effect; If DR or CR>1, there would be a positive effect. We also calculated TRpred (DR × CR) to indicate the simple multiplicative effects of competition and herbivory together on plant growth and TRtrue (with defoliation and competition/without defoliation and competition) to indicate the observed combined effect of both competition and herbivory [10]. If TRpred > TRtrue, there would be a synergistic interaction between competition and herbivory; If TRpred < TRtrue, there would be an antagonistic interaction. If TRpred = TRtrue, there would be no interaction.
Two-way analysis of variances (ANOVAs) were used to analyse the factorial effect of the defoliation intensities (0%, 25%, 50%, 75% or 100%) and competition (with or without) on the growth of the invasive plant, with defoliation and competition as the main factors. One-way ANOVAs were used to analyse the effect of defoliation on the growth of the invasive plant with or without the competitor. In the ANOVAs, the response indices were log-transformed and the other indices were log-transformed only when the assumption of homoscedasticity of the indices was not met. The homogeneity of the variance was evaluated using Levene's test. Statistical significance was taken at p<0.05.
Results
Effect of Competition on Mikania Responses to Defoliation
Defoliation significantly decreased the above- and below-ground and total biomass of Mikania growing alone, whereas 25% and 75% defoliation had no significant effect on the growth of Mikania growing with native Coix except for the below-ground biomass (Fig. 1). Defoliation intensities from 50% to 100% significantly reduced the root/shoot ratio of Mikania when growing alone, whereas 25% and 50% defoliation significantly increased the ratio of Mikania growing with native Coix (Fig. 1). Defoliation significantly decreased the light use efficiency and water use efficiency, yet only 100% defoliation significantly decreased the net photosynthetic rate of Mikania growing alone (Fig. 2). Defoliation intensities of 25% and 75% significantly increased the net photosynthetic rate and light use efficiency while 75% defoliation significantly increased the water use efficiency of Mikania growing with native Coix (Fig. 2). The two-way ANOVAs results showed that defoliation had a significant effect on all of the growth and physiological traits of Mikania (Table 1).
Values are means ±standard deviation. The different lowercase and uppercase letters indicate significant differences (p<0.05) among the defoliation intensities of invasive Mikania micrantha growing with and without a native competitor, respectively. * indicates a significant difference (p<0.05) between the treatments with or without the competitor.
Values are means ±standard deviation. The different lowercase and uppercase letters indicate significant differences (p<0.05) among the different intensities of defoliation of invasive Mikania micrantha growing with and without native competitor, respectively. * indicates significant differences (p<0.05) between the treatments with or without competitor.
In terms of the above-ground biomass, the defoliation response values of Mikania were all less than 0 and decreased with increasing defoliation intensities (Fig. 3), indicating a negative effect of defoliation on Mikania, regardless of the presence of competition: the more leaves that were removed, the more the above-ground biomass was decreased. However, the response values to the defoliation intensity of Mikania growing with native Coix were all significantly higher than those of Mikania growing alone, particularly at 75% defoliation (Fig. 3), indicating a compensatory growth of Mikania to defoliation was induced by the growth of native Coix.
Effect of Defoliation on Mikania Responses to Competition
Competition significantly decreased the above- and below-ground and total biomass of Mikania at 0% defoliation (Fig. 1). When Mikania was treated with 25%, 50% and 100% defoliation, competition had no effect on its growth; in contrast, competition significantly increased growth when Mikania was treated with 75% defoliation (Fig. 1). Competition significantly decreased the root/shoot ratio at 0% defoliation and significantly increased the root/shoot ratio at 50% defoliation but had no effect at 25%, 75% and 100% defoliation (Fig. 1). Competition significantly decreased the net photosynthetic rate, light use efficiency and water use efficiency at 0% defoliation, whereas 75% defoliation resulted in a similar net photosynthetic rate and a greater water use efficiency; 25%, 75% and 100% defoliation increased the light use efficiency, with a statistical significance at 100% defoliation (Fig. 2). The two-way ANOVAs results showed that competition had a significant effect on the root/shoot ratio, net photosynthetic rate, light use efficiency and water use efficiency (Table 1).
Based on the above-ground biomass, the competition response values of Mikania at 0% and 50% defoliation were less than 0, whereas those at 25%, 75% and 100% defoliation were more than 0, indicating that competition had a negative effect on the growth of Mikania at 0% and 50% defoliation but had a positive effect on the growth of Mikania at 25%, 75% and 100% defoliation. The competition response values of Mikania at different defoliation intensities were higher than those without defoliation, particularly at 75% (Fig. 4), indicating that defoliation could alleviate the negative effect of competition on the growth of Mikania.
Values are means±standard deviation. Different lower case letters indicate significant differences between the defoliation intensities at p<0.05.
Interactive Effect of Competition and Defoliation on Mikania
Both competition and defoliation significantly reduced the growth of Mikania compared to the plants of the species grown without competition and defoliation (Fig. 1). The TPtrue values were all significantly higher than the TPpred values, regardless of the intensity with which Mikania was defoliated, indicating an antagonistic interactive effect between competition and defoliation on the growth of Mikania (Fig. 5). The two-way ANOVAs results showed that the defoliation × competition interaction had a significant effect on all of the growth and physiological traits of Mikania (Table 1).
Values are means±standard deviation. The different lowercase letters indicate a significant difference between the defoliation intensities at p<0.05. * indicates significant differences (p<0.05) between the treatments with or without competitor.
Discussion
Both competition and herbivory by native species could affect the invasiveness of introduced species and often limit the success of invasive species in a recipient community [18]. However, the compensatory growth responses of plants after herbivory damage can alleviate the potential deleterious effects of herbivory and can have a positive impact on the fitness of plants [38], intensifying the negative impact on the native neighbour and releasing the invasive species from competition [39]. Walling and Zabinski have found that the competitive ability of invasive Centaurea maculosa to outgrow native plants was intensified by the compensatory growth produced by defoliation, which resulted in a greater capture of resources [31]. In our study, just as we predicted, the effect of the interaction between competition and defoliation on the growth of Mikania was less than their individual effects, indicating an antagonism. Similar antagonistic effects have also been found in invasive Centaurea melitensis [20], Centaurea solstitialis [34] and Poa annua [10]. In the present study, the antagonistic interactive effect of defoliation and competition from native Coix on invasive Mikania and the consequent compensatory growth of Mikania might be one of the possible mechanisms why host-specific biological control agents could not successfully control invasive plants in an invaded community.
It has been commonly verified that plants may compensate for tissue losses due to defoliation, resulting in increased growth relative to non-defoliated plants [30], [40]. Different from these conclusions, in this study, defoliation had a negative effect on the growth of invasive Mikania growing alone: growth declined with increasing defoliation intensities. However, the negative effect of defoliation may be modified by competition. The response values to different defoliation intensities tested on Mikania growing with native Coix were all significantly higher than those of Mikania growing alone, indicating a compensatory growth of Mikania induced by competition in response to defoliation, particularly at 75% defoliation. This result indicates that native Coix could help invasive Mikania be more vigorous after defoliation.
Although the mechanism underling the compensatory growth of Mikania that is induced by the competition is unknown, the underground network between the roots of invasive Mikania and native Coix mediated by mycorrhizae might be a possible mechanism. Although it is still unknown why defoliation can induce a potential transfer of nutrients between a plant and a neighbouring plant, evidence using stable isotopes verified that defoliation could change the underground nitrogen flow [41] and that carbon could be transferred via mycorrhizae from native neighbouring plants to the invasive plant [42]. Native Coix is a mycorrhizal plant [43], and the soil in the Mikania community is rich in fungi [44]. It has also been verified that native neighbours are capable of enhancing compensatory growth of invasive plants to defoliation in the presence of soil fungi [20], [34]. Further atention should be paid to the underground mechanism.
The successfully invasive plants are always strong competitors of the native plant species, however, native plants has been verified as a major force in the resistance of exotic invasions [3], [45]. In this study, competition from native Coix did significantly decrease the growth of invasive Mikania because of the limited resources. However, the negative effect of competition on the growth of Mikania may be modified by defoliation. The response values of Mikania to competition increased at each defoliation intensity, indicating a release from native competitor Coix induced by defoliation, particularly at 75% defoliation. The release of Mikania from competition that can be induced by defoliation could increase the number of invasive plants and allow the domination of niche spaces to the detriment of native species [46], perhaps facilitating the invasiveness of Mikania and helping to shape the structure and dynamics of the invaded communities.
Plants have the ability to (at least partially) compensate for herbivory only above a certain threshold level of damage [29], and this threshold can differ among plant species. Yu et al. found that invasive Alternanthera philoxeroides can only rapidly recover from 50% defoliation [47]. Similarly, in the present study, when the native Coix was present, 75% defoliation induced the compensatory growth of invasive Mikania. Many morphological and physiological mechanisms have been proposed to explain the compensatory growth that follows herbivory or defoliation [30], such as the increased allocation of substrates from the roots to shoots [48] and the increased photosynthetic rate of the regrowing tissue [49]. In our study, 75% defoliation decreased the root/shoot ratio and significantly increased net photosynthetic rate, light use efficiency and water use efficiency. The resources stored in the roots were shifted to the shoots, significantly reducing the root/shoot ratio [50]. Barton found that Plantago lanceolata (Plantaginaceae) seedlings were plastic in their resource allocation between the shoots and roots, resulting in compensatory growth [50]. This type of strong compensatory growth due to phenotypic plasticity and the physiological acclimation of invasive Mikania was maximised at 75% defoliation.
Although artificial defoliation has been widely used to mimic the effect of truly herbivory on plants [12], [28]–[30], [51], there are undeniably significant differences between defoliation and herbivory [52]. Artificial defoliation can only mimic the effect of the loss of leaf area which decreased the ability of plants to intercept light [53] but not the effect in responding to the physiological and chemical interactions (e.g., due to nutrient supply) between herbivores and plants. In spite of some pitfalls, artificial defoliation has been used more often in herbivory research than real herbivores for easily and precisely controlling, targeted effect and efficient experimental designs [53]. And there were only a few cases (as low as 3%) with the outcomes where artificial and natural damage had opposite effects on plants. The biological control agent of Mikania are found to consume all of the young leaves and stems of Mikania [26], so the defoliation can at least partially mimic the effect of the loss of leaf area caused by the biological control agent.
In conclusion, our results suggest that natural herbivory might not necessarily be safely used as a potential agent to control invasive Mikania in the field because of the induced compensatory growth of Mikania by native Coix. Further studies should consider the interactions at the intertrophic and multitrophic levels in invaded communities as well as among more factors including, e.g., nutrient supply which seems difficult to investigate with simulated herbivore, whereby the ecological risk of the releasing of the biological control agents can be comprehensively evaluated.
Acknowledgments
We thank T. Suwa for the useful comments on the paper and E. Leila and K. Bill for the English editing.
Author Contributions
Conceived and designed the experiments: JL MD. Performed the experiments: JL. Analyzed the data: JL MD. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: JL. Wrote the paper: JL MD.
References
- 1. Mack RN, Simberloff D, Lonsdale WM, Evans H, Clout M, et al. (2001) Biotic invasions: causes, epidemiology, global consequences, and control. Ecological Applications 10: 689–710.
- 2. Vilà M, Weiner J (2004) Are invasive plant species better competitors than native plant species? –evidence from pair-wise experiments. Oikos 105: 229–238.
- 3. Keane RM, Crawley MJ (2002) Exotic plant invasions and the enemy release hypothesis. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 17: 164–170.
- 4. McEvoy P, Cox C, Coombs E (1991) Successful biological control of ragwort, Senecio jacobaea, by introduce insects in Oregon. Ecology Applications 1: 430–442.
- 5. Barton JE, Fowler SV, Gianotti AF, Winks CJ, de Beurs M, et al. (2007) Successful biological control of mist flower (Ageratina riparia) in New Zealand: Agent establishment, impact and benefits to the native flora. Biological Control 40: 370–385.
- 6. Műller-Schärer H, Schaffner U, Steinger T (2004) Evolution in invsaive plants: implications for biological control. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 19: 417–422.
- 7. Dray JR FA (2001) Center TD, Wheeler GS (2001) Lessons from unsuccessful attempts to establish Spodoptera pectinicornis (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), a biological control agent of waterlettuce. Biocontrol Science and Technology 11: 301–316.
- 8. Pearson DE, Callaway RM (2003) Indirect effects of host-specific biological control agents. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 18: 456–461.
- 9. Boege K (2010) Induced responses to competition and herbivory: natural selection on multi-trait phenotypic plasticity. Ecology 91: 2628–2637.
- 10. Schädler M, Brandl R, Haase J (2007) Antagonistic interactions between plant competition and insect herbivory. Ecology 88: 1490–1498.
- 11. Doyle R, Grodowitz M, Smart M, Owens C (2007) Separate and interactive effects of competition and herbivory on the growth, expansion, and tuber formation of Hydrilla verticillata. Biological Control 41: 327–338.
- 12. Ferrero-Serrano Á, Collier TR, Hild AL, Mealor BA, Smith T (2008) Combined impacts of native grass competition and introduced weevil herbivory on Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense). Rangeland Ecology & Management 61: 529–534.
- 13. Sheppard AW, Smyth MJ, Swirepik A (2001) The impact of a root-crown weevil and pasture competition on the winter annual Echium plantagineum. Journal of Applied Ecology 38: 291–300.
- 14. Turner PJ, Morin L, Williams DG, Kriticos DJ (2010) Inte ractions between a leafhopper and rust fungus on the invasive plant Asparagus asparagoides in Australia: A case of two agents being better than one for biological control. Biological Control 54: 322–330.
- 15. Sciegienka JK, Keren EN, Menalled FD (2011) Interactions between two biological control agents and an herbicide for Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) suppression. Invasive Plant Science & Management 4: 151–158.
- 16.
Crawley MJ (1997) Plant-herbivory dynamics. Seeds: the ecology of regeneration in plant communities (eds M. Fenner M), 401–474. CAB International, Wallingford.
- 17. Newingham BA, Callaway RM (2006) Shoot herbivory on the invasive plant, Centaura maculosa, does not reduce its competitive effects on conspecific and natives. Oikos 114: 397–406.
- 18. Levine JM, Adler PB, Yelenik SG (2004) A meta-analysis of biotic resistance to exotic plant invasions. Ecological Letters 7: 975–989.
- 19. Suwa T, Louda SM, Russell FL (2010) No interaction between competition and herbivory in limiting introduced Cirsium vulgare rosette growth and reproduction. Oecologia 162: 91–102.
- 20. Callaway RM, Newingham B, Zabinski CA, Mahall BE (2001) Compensatory growth and competitive ability of an invasive weed are enhanced by soil fungi and native neighbours. Ecology Letters. 4: 429–433.
- 21. Zhang LY, Ye WH, Cao HL, Feng HL (2004) Mikania micrantha H.B.K. in China—an overview. Weed Research 44: 42–49.
- 22. Cock MJW (1982) The biology and host specificity of Liothrips mikaniae (Priesner) (Thysanoptera: Phlaeothripidae), a potential biological control agent of Mikania micrantha (Compositae). Bulletin of Entomological Research 72: 523–533.
- 23.
Waterhouse DF (1994) Biological control of weeds: Southeast Asia prospects. Canberra, ACIAR.
- 24. Puettmann KJ, Saunders MR (2001) Patterns of growth compensation in eastern white pine (Pinus strobes L.): the influence of herbivory intensity and competitive environments. Oecologia 129: 376–384.
- 25.
Desmier de chenon R (2003) Feeding preference tests of two Nymphalid butterflies, Acinote thalia pyrrha and Actinote anteas from South America for the biocontorl of Mikania micrantha (Asteraceae) in South East Asia. Exotic pest and their control (eds R.J. Zhnag, C.Q, Zhou, H, Pang), 201, Sun Yat Sen University Press, Guangzhou.
- 26. Li ZG, Han SC, Guo MF, Li LY (2003) Rearing Actinote thalia pyrrha and Actinote anteas on potted Mikania micrantha. Entomolog Knowledge 40: 561–564.
- 27. Li ZG, Han SC, Guo MF (2004) Biology and host specificity of Actinote anteas, a biocontrol agent for contorlling Mikania micrantha. Chinese Journal of Biological Control 20: 170–173.
- 28. Richards JH (1984) Root growth response to defoliation in two Agropyron bunchgrasses with an improved root periscope. Oecologia 64: 21–25.
- 29. Ruiz R, Ward D, Saltz D (2008) Leaf compensatory growth as a tolerance strategy to resist herbivory in Pancratium sickenbergeri. Plant Ecology 198: 19–26.
- 30. Ballina-Gómez HS, Iriarte-Vivar S, Orellana R, Santiago LS (2010) Compensatory growth responses to defoliation and light availability in two native Mexican woody plant species. Journal of. Tropical Ecology 26: 163–171.
- 31. Walling SZ, Zabinski CA (2006) Defoliation effects on arbuscular mycorrhizae and plant growth of two native bunchgrasses and an invasive forb. Applied Soil Ecology 32: 111–117.
- 32. Watt MS, Whitehead D, Kriticos DJ, Gous SF, Richardson B (2007) Using a process-based model to analyse compensatory growth in response to defoliation: simulating herbivory by a biological control a biological control agent. Biological Control 43: 119–129.
- 33. Bacilio-Jiménez M, Aguilar-Flores S, del Valle MV, Pérez A, Zepeda A, et al. (2001) Endophytic bacteria in rice seeds inhibit early colonization of roots. Soil Biology & Biochemistry 33: 167–172.
- 34. Callaway RM, Kim J, Mahall BE (2006) Defoliation of Centaurea solstitialis stimulates compensatory growth and intensifies negative effects on neighbors. Biological Invasions 8: 1389–1397.
- 35. Vanderklein DW, Reich PB (1999) The effect of defoliation intensity and history on photosynthesis, growth and carbon reserves of two conifers with contrasting leaf lifespans and growth habits. New Phytologist 144: 121–132.
- 36. Long SP, Baker NR, Rains CA (1993) Analyzing the responses of photosynthetic CO2 assimilation to long-term elevation of atmospheric CO2 concentration. Vegetation 104: 33–45.
- 37. Hamid MA, Agata W, Kawamitsu Y (1990) Photosynthesis, transpiration and water use efficiency in four cultivars of mungbean, Vigna radiate (L.) Wilczek. Photosynthetica 24: 96–101.
- 38. McNaughton SJ (1983) Compensatory plant growth as a response to herbivory. Oikos 40: 329–336.
- 39. Callaway RM, Deluca TH, Belliveau WM (1999) Biological-control herbivores may increase competitive ability of the noxious weed Centaurea maculosa. Ecology 80: 1196–1201.
- 40. McNaughton SJ (1979) Grazing as an optimization process–grass ungulate relationships in the Serengeti. American Naturalist 113: 691–703.
- 41. Ayres E, Dromph KM, Cook R, Ostle N, Bardgett RD (2007) The influence of below-ground herbivory and defoliation of a legume on nitrogen transfer to neighbouring plants. Functional Ecology 21: 256–263.
- 42. Carey EV, Marler MJ, Callaway RM (2004) Mycorrhizae transfer carbon from a native grass to an invasive weed: evidence from stable isotopes and physiology. Plant Ecology 172: 133–141.
- 43. Charoenpakdee S, Phosri C, Dell B, Choonluechanon S, Lumyong S (2010) Compatible arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi of Jatropha curcas and spore multiplication using cereal crops. Mycosphere 1: 195–204.
- 44. Li WH, Zhang CB, Jiang HB, Xing GR, Yang ZY (2006) Changes in soil microbial community associated with invasion of the exotic weed, Mikania micrantha H.B.K. Plant and Soil. 281: 309–324.
- 45. Mitchell CE, Agrawal AA, Bever JD, Gilbert GS, Hufbauer RA, et al. (2006) Biotic interactions and plants invasions. Ecology Letters 9: 726–740.
- 46. Tilman D (2004) Niche tradeoffs, neutrality, and community structure: a stochastic theory of resource competition, invasion, and community assembly. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 101: 10854–10861.
- 47. Yu LF, Yu D, Liu CH, Xie D (2010) Flooding effects on rapid responses of the invasive plant Alternanthera philoxeroides to defoliation. Flora 205: 449–453.
- 48. Dyer MI, Acra MA, Wang GM, Coleman DC, Freckman DW, et al. (1991) Source-sink carbon relations in two Panicum colratum ecotypes in response to herbivory. Ecology 72: 1472–1483.
- 49. Delting JK, Dyer MI, Winn DT (1979) Net photosynthesis, root respiration, an regrowth of Bouteloua gracilis following simulated grazing. Oecologia 41: 127–134.
- 50. Barton KE (2008) Phenotypic plasticity in seedling defense strategies: compensatory growth and chemical induction. Oikos 117: 917–925.
- 51. Johnson MTJ (2011) Evolutionary ecology of plant defense against herbivores. Functional Ecology 25: 305–311.
- 52.
Lehtila K, Boalt E (2004) The use and usefulness of artificial herbivory in plant-herbivore studies. In Weisser WW and Siemann E (Eds.) Ecological Studies. Vol 173: Insects and Ecosystem Function, 2004: Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. 257–275.
- 53. Trumble JT, Kolodny-Hirsch DM, Ting IP (1993) Plant compensation for anthropod herbivory. Annual Reviews of Entomology 38: 93–119.