The impact of non-native trees on galling and herbivory in New York City across space and time.

Cities and suburbs frequently plant native and non-native trees as foundation species, with non-natives cultivated in these areas for centuries while remaining non-invasive. Although previous research has found that native trees often host more arthropods, studies have not simultaneously looked across space and time to determine the consistency of tree origin on urban arthropods. We combined varied methods across spatial and temporal scales in New York City to test if native tree leaves consistently have more insect and mite interactions than long-established non-native trees, predicting stronger effect sizes for specialists (galling arthropods) than generalists (herbivory). We examined (1) congeneric species pairs, controlled for growing conditions and stoichiometry in an arboretum, (2) diverse oaks at a botanical garden, (3) community science records across Brooklyn, and (4) herbarium specimens from 1883 through present across the city. Across spatiotemporal scales, we found consistent results. Specialist interactions were striking: contemporary native trees supported numerous galling species, while only one congeneric non-native species hosted any galls. For generalists, contemporary native trees had equivalent to slightly greater herbivory. Over the last century, herbarium records showed that herbivory increased on non-native trees to nearly the level of natives, whereas native trees increased in gall abundance while non-native trees remained rarely galled. Our results demonstrate the impact of tree origin on tree-arthropod interactions in a real-world urban setting, with far fewer galls even when non-native tree species have been cultivated locally for centuries. Our findings will help city planners and property owners confidently choose native trees to promote arthropod biodiversity.