Adaptive responses to living in stressful habitats: Do invasive and native plant populations use different strategies?

Abstract

Plants inhabit stressful environments characterized by a variety of stressors, including mine sites, mountains, deserts, and high latitudes. Populations from stressful and reference (non-stressful) sites often have performance differences. However, while invasive and native species may respond differently to stressful environments, there is limited understanding of the patterns in reaction norms of populations from these sites. Here, we use phylogenetically controlled meta-analysis to assess the performance of populations under stress and non-stress conditions. We ask whether stress populations of natives and invasives differ in the magnitude of lowered performance under non-stress conditions and if they vary in the degree of performance advantage under stress. We also assessed whether these distinctions differ with stress intensity. Our findings revealed that natives not only have greater adaptive advantages but also more performance reductions than invasives. Populations from very stressful sites had more efficient adaptations, and performance costs increased with stress intensity in natives only. Overall, the results support the notion that adaptation is frequently costless. Reproductive output was most closely associated with adaptive costs and benefits. Our study characterized the adaptive strategies used by invasive and native plants under stressful conditions, thereby providing important insights into the limitations of adaptation to extreme sites.

Keywords: Bayesian phylogenetic analysis; environmental stress; local adaptation; specialization; trade‐off.