Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 215

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Invasive plants do not display greater phenotypic plasticity than their native or non‐invasive counterparts: a meta‐analysis

Palacio‐López, Kattia, Gianoli, Ernesto·2011·Oikos

Abstract

Phenotypic plasticity is commonly considered as a trait associated with invasiveness in alien plants because it may enhance the ability of plants to occupy a wide range of environments. Although the evidence of greater phenotypic plasticity in invasive plants is considerable, it is not yet conclusive. We used a meta‐analysis approach to evaluate whether invasive plant species show greater phenotypic plasticity than their native or non‐invasive counterparts. The outcome of such interspecific comparisons may be biased when phylogenetic relatedness is not taken into account. Consequently, species pairs belonged to the same genus, tribe or family. The meta‐analysis included 93 records from 35 studies reporting plastic responses to light, nutrients, water, CO 2 , herbivory and support availability. Contrary to what is often assumed, overall, phenotypic plasticity was similar between invasive plants and native or non‐invasive closely related species. The same result was found when separate analyses were conducted for trait plasticity to nutrients, light and water availability. Thus, invasive plant species and their native or non‐invasive counterparts are equally capable of displaying functional responses to environmental heterogeneity. The colonization of a wide range of environments by invasive plants could be due to their capacity to undergo adaptive ecotypic differentiation rather than to their ability to display plastic responses. Alternatively, phenotypic plasticity might play a role in plant invasion, but only during the initial phases, when tolerance of the novel environment is essential for plant survival. Afterwards, once alien plants are identified as invaders, the magnitude of phenotypic plasticity might be reduced after selection of the optimum phenotypes in each habitat. The identification of plant traits that consistently predict invasiveness might be a futile task because different traits favor invasiveness in different environments. Approaches at the local scale, focusing on the ecology of specific invasive plants, could be more fruitful than global macro‐analyses.

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.1600-0706.2010.19114.x

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 215

Metadata

Authors
Palacio‐López, K., & Gianoli, E.
Venue
Oikos
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-05-31
Volume
120
Issue
9
Pages
1393-1401
ISSN
  • 0030-1299 (ISSN-L)
  • 1600-0706
OpenAlex
W2116263155
Cited by
215
References
4
FWCI
12.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Invasive plants do not display greater phenotypic plasticity than their native or non‐invasive counterparts: a meta‐analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1600-0706.2010.19114.x
The paper
Palacio‐López, K., & Gianoli, E. (2011). Invasive plants do not display greater phenotypic plasticity than their native or non‐invasive counterparts: a meta‐analysis. Oikos. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0706.2010.19114.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.