Geology topics

Regan Early

Publications and source records attributed to Regan Early.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2025

Why are non-native plants successful? Consistently fast economic traits and novel origin jointly explain abundance across US ecoregions

Are non-native plants abundant because they are non-native, and have advantages over native plants, or because they possess ‘fast’ resource strategies, and have advantages in disturbed environments? This question is central to invasion biology but remains unanswered. We quantified the relative importance of resource strategy and biogeographic origin in 69 441 plots across the conterminous United States containing 11 280 plant species. Non-native species had faster economic traits than native species in most plant communities (77%, 86% and 82% of plots for leaf nitrogen concentration, specific leaf area, and leaf dry matter content). Non-native species also had distinct patterns of abundance, but these were not explained by their fast traits. Compared with functionally similar native species, non-native species were (1) more abundant in plains and deserts, indicating the importance of biogeographic origin, and less abundant in forested ecoregions, (2) were more abundant where co-occurring species had fast traits, for example due to disturbance, and (3) showed weaker signals of local environmental filtering. These results clarify the nature of plant invasion: Although non-native plants have consistently fast economic traits, other novel characteristics and processes likely explain their abundance and, therefore, impacts.

conterminous United States↗

USGS2025

A quantitative classification of the geography of non-native flora in the United States

Aim Non-native plants have the potential to harm ecosystems. Harm is classically related to their distribution and abundance, but this geographical information is often unknown. Here, we assess geographical commonness as a potential indicator of invasive status for non-native flora in the United States. Geographical commonness could inform invasion risk assessments across species and ecoregions. Location Conterminous United States. Time Period Through 2022. Major Taxa Studied Plants. Methods We compiled and standardised occurrence and abundance data from 14 spatial datasets and used this information to categorise non-native species as uncommon or common based on three dimensions of commonness: area of occupancy, habitat breadth and local abundance. To assess consistency in existing categorizations, we compared commonness to invasive status in the United States. We identified species with higher-than-expected abundance relative to their occupancy, habitat breadth or residence time. We calculated non-native plant richness within United States ecoregions and estimated unreported species based on rarefaction/extrapolation curves. Results This comprehensive database identified 1874 non-native plant species recorded in 4,844,963 locations. Of these, 1221 species were locally abundant (> 10% cover) in 797,759 unique locations. One thousand one hundred one non-native species (59%) achieved at least one dimension of commonness, including 565 species that achieved all three. Species with longer residence times tended to meet more dimensions of commonness. We identified 132 species with higher-than-expected abundance. Ecoregions in the central United States have the largest estimated numbers of unreported, abundant non-native plants. Main Conclusions A high proportion of non-native species have become common in the United States. However, existing categorizations of invasive species are not always consistent with species' abundance and distribution, even after considering residence time. Considering geographical commonness and higher-than-expected abundance revealed in this new dataset could support more consistent and proactive identification of invasive plants and lead to more efficient management practices.

Conterminous United States↗

USGS2025

Using plant invasions to compare occurrence- and abundance-based calculations of biotic homogenisation: Are results complementary or contradictory?

Aim Beta diversity quantifies the similarity of ecological assemblages. Its increase, known as biotic homogenisation, can be a consequence of biological invasions. However, species occurrence (presence/absence) and abundance-based analyses can produce contradictory assessments of the magnitude and direction of changes in beta diversity. Previous work indicates these contradictions should be less frequent in nature than in theory, but a growing number of empirical studies report discrepancies between occurrence- and abundance-based approaches. Understanding if these discrepancies represent a few isolated cases or are systematic across a diversity of ecosystems would allow us to better understand the general patterns, mechanisms and impacts of biotic homogenisation. Location United States. Time Period 1963–2020. Major Taxa Studied Vascular plants. Methods We used a dataset of more than 70,000 vegetation survey plots to assess differences in biotic homogenisation with and without invasion using both occurrence- and abundance-based metrics of beta diversity. We estimated taxonomic biotic homogenisation by comparing beta diversity of invaded and uninvaded plots with both classes of metrics and investigated the characteristics of the non-native species pool that influenced the likelihood that these metrics disagree. Results In 78% of plot comparisons, occurrence- and abundance-based calculations agreed in direction, and the two metrics were generally well correlated. Our empirical results are consistent with previous theory. Discrepancies between the metrics were more likely when the same non-native species was at high cover at both plots compared for beta diversity, and when these plots were spatially distant. Main Conclusions In about 20% of cases, our calculations revealed differences in direction (homogenisation vs. differentiation) when comparing occurrence- and abundance-based metrics, indicating that the metrics are not interchangeable, especially when distances between plots are high and invader diversity is low. When data permit, combining the two approaches can offer insights into the role of invasions and extirpations in driving biotic homogenisation/differentiation.

Global Ecology and Biogeography↗

USGS2024

Naturalized species drive functional trait shifts in plant communities

Despite decades of research documenting the consequences of naturalized and invasive plant species on ecosystem functions, our understanding of the functional underpinnings of these changes remains rudimentary. This is partially due to ineffective scaling of trait differences between native and naturalized species to whole plant communities. Working with data from over 75,000 plots and over 5,500 species from across the United States, we show that changes in the functional composition of communities associated with increasing abundance of naturalized species mirror the differences in traits between native and naturalized plants. We find that communities with greater abundance of naturalized species are more resource acquisitive aboveground and belowground, shorter, more shallowly rooted, and increasingly aligned with an independent strategy for belowground resource acquisition via thin fine roots with high specific root length. We observe shifts toward herbaceous-dominated communities but shifts within both woody and herbaceous functional groups follow community-level patterns for most traits. Patterns are remarkably similar across desert, grassland, and forest ecosystems. Our results demonstrate that the establishment and spread of naturalized species, likely in combination with underlying environmental shifts, leads to predictable and consistent changes in community-level traits that can alter ecosystem functions.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences↗

USGS2023

Macroscale analyses suggest invasive plant impacts depend more on the composition of invading plants than on environmental context

Aim Native biodiversity is threatened by the spread of non-native invasive species. Many studies demonstrate that invasions reduce local biodiversity but we lack an understanding of how impacts vary across environments at the macroscale. Using ~11,500 vegetation surveys from ecosystems across the United States, we quantified how the relationship between non-native plant cover and native plant diversity varied across different compositions of invading plants (measured by non-native plant richness and evenness) and environmental contexts (measured by productivity and human activity). Location Continental United States. Time Period Surveys from 1990s-present. Major Taxa Studied Terrestrial plant communities. Methods We fit mixed effects models to understand how native plant richness, diversity and evenness varied with non-native cover. We tested how this relationship varied when non-native cover interacted with non-native plant richness and evenness, and with productivity and human activity. Results Across the United States, communities with greater cover of non-native plants had lower native plant richness and diversity but higher evenness, suggesting rare native plants can be lost while dominant plants decline in abundance. The relationship between non-native cover and native community diversity varied with non-native plant richness and evenness but was not associated with productivity and human activity. Negative associations were strongest in areas with low non-native richness and evenness, characterizing plant communities that were invaded by a dominant non-native plant. Main Conclusions Non-native plant cover provides a first approximation of invasion impacts on native community diversity, but the magnitude of impact depended on non-native plant richness and evenness. Relationships between non-native cover and native diversity were consistent in strength across continental scale gradients of productivity and human activity. Therefore, at the macroscale, invasive plant impacts on native plant communities likely depend more on the characteristics of the invading plants, that is the presence of a dominant invader, than on the environmental context.

Global Ecology and Biogeography↗

USGS2020

Adjusting the lens of invasion biology to focus on the impacts of climate-driven range shifts

As Earth’s climate rapidly changes, species range shifts are considered key to species persistence. However, some range-shifting species will alter community structure and ecosystem processes. By adapting existing invasion risk assessment frameworks, we can identify characteristics shared with high-impact introductions and thus predict potential impacts. There are fundamental differences between introduced and range-shifting species, primarily shared evolutionary histories between range shifters and their new community. Nevertheless, impacts can occur via analogous mechanisms, such as wide dispersal, community disturbance and low biotic resistance. As ranges shift in response to climate change, we have an opportunity to develop plans to facilitate advantageous movements and limit those that are problematic.

Nature Climate Change↗