ArticleEcology letters2025
Non-Native Plants Attain Native Levels of Microherbivory Richness With Time and Range Expansion.
Article in Ecology letters, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The impact of non-native trees on galling and herbivory in New York City across space and time.Oecologia · 2026Article
- Article
- Non-Native Plants Attain Native Levels of Microherbivory Richness With Time and Range Expansion.Ecology letters · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Non-native plants are often seen as peripheral to trophic networks due to a lack of co-evolution with local biota, but the factors shaping their integration remain poorly understood. Using a continent-wide dataset of 127,000 plant-microherbivore interactions across Europe, we show that native plants host more microherbivore species than non-natives. Among non-native plants, the number of associated microherbivore species was better predicted by time since introduction and range size in the introduced range than by relatedness to native flora or geographic origin. Species introduced more than two centuries ago, or with ranges as large as the average native plant, supported similar numbers of microherbivores as natives, though with a greater share of generalists. Our findings suggest that trophic networks can absorb novelty rapidly, with non-natives attaining levels of microherbivory richness comparable to natives over relatively short timescales, but the persistence of specialised interactions remains dependent on native flora.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.