Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40820650›Full record

ReviewThe New phytologist2025

When the novelty wears off: enemy spillover drives plant invasion success.

Ian A Dickie, Warwick J Allen, Lauren P Waller

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The New phytologist, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Ian A Dickie *School of Biological Sciences, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, 8140, New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2740-2128
Warwick J Allen *Manaaki Whenua - Landcare Research, Lincoln, 7640, New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1859-1668
Lauren P Waller *Lincoln University, Lincoln, 7647, New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7110-6027

Funding

Tertiary Education Commission CORE funding to Bioprotection Aotearoa
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Integrating plant physiological traits (ideal weed hypothesis) and interactions with enemies (enemy release hypothesis) may be key to understanding plant invasions. Contrary to enemy release, recent evidence suggests that invasive plants often accumulate generalist enemies due to the same r-selected physiological traits that often drive invasive success. Despite high enemy loads, successful invasive plants can remain dominant due to high growth rates rather than due to lack of damage. Consequently, generalist herbivore and pathogen populations may be amplified by invaders and can spillover onto native plants, with these indirect interactions disproportionately affecting native rather than invasive plant species via apparent competition. Where this occurs, the generalist enemies of invasive plants may instead be hidden allies that amplify invader success and impacts.

Indexed as

Introduced SpeciesPlant Physiological PhenomenaPlantsAnimalsHerbivoryapparent competitionenemy accumulationherbivoryindirect interactionsinvasional meltdowninvasion ecologypathogens

Identifiers

PMID40820650
PMCPMC12529021

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.