Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 413

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Conifers as invasive aliens: a global survey and predictive framework

Open access
Richardson, David M., Rejmánek, Marcel·2004·Diversity and Distributions

Abstract

We summarize information on naturalized and invasive conifers (class Pinopsida) worldwide (data from 40 countries, some with remote states/territories), and contrast these findings with patterns for other gymnosperms (classes Cycadopsida, Gnetopsida and Ginkgoopsida) and for woody angiosperms. Eighty conifer taxa (79 species and one hybrid; 13% of species) are known to be naturalized, and 36 species (6%) are ‘invasive’. This categorization is based on objective and conservative criteria relating to consistency of reproduction, distance of spread from founders, and degree of reliance on propagules from the founder population for persistence in areas well outside the natural range of species. Twenty‐eight of the known invasive conifers belong to one family (Pinaceae) and 21 of these are in one genus (Pinus). The Cupressaceae (including Taxodiaceae) has six known invasive species (4%) in four genera, but the other four conifer families have none. There are also no known invasive species in classes Cycadopsida, Gnetopsida or Ginkgoopsida. No angiosperm family comprising predominantly trees and shrubs has proportionally as many invasive species as the Pinaceae. Besides the marked taxonomic bias in favour of Pinaceae, and Pinus in particular, invasiveness in conifers is associated with a syndrome of life‐history traits: small seed mass (< 50 mg), short juvenile period (< 10 year), and short intervals between large seed crops. Cryptomeria japonica, Larix decidua, Picea sitchensis, Pinus contorta, Pinus strobus, and Pseudotsuga menziesii exemplify this syndrome. Many rare and endangered conifer species exhibit opposite characters. These results are consistent with earlier predictions made using a discriminant function derived from attributes of invasive and noninvasive Pinus species. Informative exceptions are species with small seeds (< 4 mg, e.g. Chamaecyparis spp., Pinus banksiana, Tsuga spp. — mostly limited to wet/mineral substrates) or otherwise ‘non‐invasive’ characters (e.g. large seeds, fleshy fruits, e.g. Araucaria araucana, Pinus pinea, Taxus baccata that are dependent on vertebrates for seed dispersal). Most conifers do not require coevolved mutualists for pollination and seed dispersal. Also, many species can persist in small populations but have the genetic and reproductive capacity to colonize and increase population size rapidly. The underlying mechanisms mediating conifer invasions are thus easier to discern than is the case for most angiosperms. Further information is needed to determine the extent to which propagule pressure (widespread dissemination, abundant plantings, long history of cultivation) can compensate for low ‘inherent invasiveness’.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1366-9516.2004.00096.x

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 413

Metadata

Authors
Richardson, D. M., & Rejmánek, M.
Venue
Diversity and Distributions
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2004-09
Volume
10
Issue
5-6
Pages
321-331
ISSN
  • 0967-9952 (ISSN-L)
  • 1366-9516
  • 1472-4642
OpenAlex
W1788478503
Cited by
413
References
0
FWCI
12.60
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: Conifers as invasive aliens: a global survey and predictive framework. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1366-9516.2004.00096.x
The paper
Richardson, D. M., & Rejmánek, M. (2004). Conifers as invasive aliens: a global survey and predictive framework. Diversity and Distributions. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1366-9516.2004.00096.x

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.