The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Plant invasions and extinction debts
Open accessAbstract
Whether introduced species invasions pose a major threat to biodiversity is hotly debated. Much of this debate is fueled by recent findings that competition from introduced organisms has driven remarkably few plant species to extinction. Instead, native plant species in invaded ecosystems are often found in refugia: patchy, marginal habitats unsuitable to their nonnative competitors. However, whether the colonization and extinction dynamics of these refugia allow long-term native persistence is uncertain. Of particular concern is the possibility that invasive plants may induce an extinction debt in the native flora, where persistence over the short term masks deterministic extinction trajectories. We examined how invader impacts on landscape structure influence native plant persistence by combining recently developed quantitative techniques for evaluating metapopulation persistence with field measurements of an invaded plant community. We found that European grass invasion of an edaphically heterogeneous California landscape has greatly decreased the likelihood of the persistence of native metapopulations. It does so via two main pathways: ( i ) decreasing the size of native refugia, which reduces seed production and increases local extinction, and ( ii ) eroding the dispersal permeability of the matrix between refugia, which reduces their connectivity. Even when native plant extinction is the deterministic outcome of invasion, the time to extinction can be on the order of hundreds of years. We conclude that the relatively short time since invasion in many parts of the world is insufficient to observe the full impact of plant invasions on native biodiversity.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Hobbs, R. J., & Mooney, H. A. (1998) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.1998.96233.x · Cited by 185
Cited by
Global ecological impacts of invasive species in aquatic ecosystems
Gallardo, B., Clavero, M., Sánchez, M. I., & Vilà, M. (2016) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/gcb.13004 · Cited by 1,245
Frankham, R., Bradshaw, C. J. A., & Brook, B. W. (2014) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2013.12.036 · Cited by 1,155
Invasive alien plant species: Their impact on environment, ecosystem services and human health
Kumar Rai, P., & Singh, J. S. (2020) · Ecological Indicators · doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.106020 · Cited by 616
Extinction risk and threats to plants and fungi
Nic Lughadha, E., Bachman, S. P., Leão, T. C. C., Forest, F., Halley, J. M., Moat, J., Acedo, C., Bacon, K. L., Brewer, R. F. A., Gâteblé, G., et al. (2020) · PLANTS, PEOPLE, PLANET · doi:10.1002/ppp3.10146 · Cited by 451
Alien versus native species as drivers of recent extinctions
Blackburn, T. M., Bellard, C., & Ricciardi, A. (2019) · Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment · doi:10.1002/fee.2020 · Cited by 418
Metadata
- Authors
- Gilbert, B., & Levine, J. M.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 2013-01-07
- Volume
- 110
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1744-1749
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- OpenAlex
- W2040432821
- Cited by
- 232
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 15.76
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Plant invasions and extinction debts. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.1212375110
- The paper
- Gilbert, B., & Levine, J. M. (2013). Plant invasions and extinction debts. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1212375110
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.